Nathan Tyree: A Cartesian Argument for Dualism

---

1. I can know with certainty that I exist (from Descartes)
2. I cannot know with certainty that my body exists (also from Descartes)
3. Therefore I am not my body.
4. It follows then that if I exist but am not my body that I must be my soul.


Personally I don’t buy this argument. There are several flaws with the reasoning, but it does lead one down interesting roads.

Thoughts?




Tags (beta): philosophy

Comments (3)

Nathan Tyree: Linguistic Muddles?

---

Something David said in the HRC discussion got me to thinking. He claimed that my usage of “average” was improper. That leads to this.

Wittgenstein (along with the Logical Positivists*) viewed Philosophy as a critique of language. The argued that philosophical “problems” actually arose from the vague and imprecise nature of language. Some went so far as to suggest that a perfectly constructed language would banish philosophical problems forever.

The question I pose is: were they right? Can we really view the mind-body problem or the question of free will simply as linguistic muddles? If I claim that you don’t have a soul and you disagree are we merely arguing semantics?

Anyone?



*Kant hinted at this sort of thing when he demolished Anselm’s Ontological argument by pointing out that existence is not a predicate.





Tags (beta): logic, language, philosophy

Comments (11)