Maman 1

Michael Maman
PHIL330 Philosophy of Mind Exam #1
Descartes
Renee Descartes methodological skepticism is perhaps one of the earliest and most
influential examples of rigorous, systematic epistemological inquiry into separating truth from
fictitious beliefs. During this process of doubting every belief he once held to be true, Descartes
develops the idea of substance dualism (also known as Cartesian dualism) after asserting beyond
a doubt that he exists as a thinking thing. From that declaration, Cartesian dualism puts forth the
notion that every substance in the universe is comprised of both physical and mental properties;
and finally, that minds are distinct from physical bodies that causally interact. However, before
further expanding the scope of Descartes work, it is necessary to begin the discussion from the
projects foundations.
Descartes takes some time to arrive at the idea of substance dualism in his work on
methodological skepticism, Meditations on First Philosophy.

He begins the Meditations with

radical skepticism, saying that he has held many false beliefs in the past, and that the senses can
and have been very deceptive. In some instances, he says, it is impossible to distinguish between
sensations and perceptions in dreams from waking reality. Thus, he chooses to literally doubt
everything, metaphorically razing his dubious beliefs to the ground and starting on what he
hoped would be superior foundations. This is the Cartesian foundationalist project, where
Descartes sought to build good and strong foundations of beliefs he hoped to know for certain
were true.
The Cartesian foundationalist project was a noble endeavor, but one that would prove to
be incredibly difficult for Descartes to accomplish. He continuously found himself at an impasse
to declare which beliefs he could say were indubitably true. Descartes employed his method of

Maman 2
doubt to systematically deconstruct different knowledge foundations, beginning with the senses.
For Descartes, having senses assume the first level of doubt seemed evident, as examples abound
in everyday life, such as faulty vision, memory, hearing, etc. However, in the Meditations,
Descartes makes it clear that he sometimes has difficulty distinguishing between dreaming and
the waking world, so the second level of doubt is the notion of being awake in the real world.
This takes the doubt to an even greater level because Descartes begins to doubt the validity of the
external world, unlike the first level with acknowledging the deceptive nature of the senses.
Finally, Descartes reaches a third level of doubt in the realms of logic and mathematics. He
acknowledges that even if the senses deceive and the external world is illusory, the rules of math
and logic still hold true. So, Descartes postulates the existence of a malevolent demon, or evil
genius that deceives him about the rules of that realm as well, believing all types of falsehoods.
With the three levels of doubt established, it seems as though Descartes has cornered
himself and cannot complete his foundationalist project. However, he reaches an insight in the
second meditation to discover that despite all of his doubt and uncertainty, he cannot doubt that
he exists, for he is a thinking thing, able to doubt the grandest deception. He calls this
fundamental truth of uncompromised thought the Cogito, and it is a breakthrough for him in the
Meditations, which affirms his existence. From this point, Descartes uses the Cogito as a
springboard to affirm substance dualism.

He does this through asserting that the mind is

indivisible and unified, unlike the physical body that can be divided into parts. His other
arguments for duality are that both mind and body perform different functions and have different
levels of access for the agent. For example, each agent has indubitable access to the
intersubjective contents of his/her own mind, access that cannot compete with knowledge of
body. In addition, to follow the Cogito, Descartes asserts the purpose of the mind is to think in a

Maman 3
non spatially extended space, unlike the body that is restricted by space.
The last part of Cartesian dualism that remains unclear is the tenet that the mind and body
casually interact with one another. Descartes never specifies how the mind interacts with the
body and vice versa, and one wonders how it is even conceivable given that the mind is
immaterial and the body material.
The problem of interaction continues to pose problems for Cartesian dualism.
Nevertheless, Descartes was extremely influential in a developing a systematic method to
tackling doubt and skepticism in search of true beliefs. Although many philosophers,
psychologists, and neuroscientists of today disagree with Cartesian dualism, it continues to
impact the way people view the mind as a distinct entity from the brain and physical body.

Hempel

Maman 4
Descartes mind-body substance dualism greatly impacted peoples views of seeing the
mind as distinct from the physical body. However, in the twentieth century, behaviorists and
logical positivists took great issue with the notion of Cartesian dualism because it prized the
intersubjective contents of the mind, whose contents are indubitable only to the agent alone.
Carl Hempel discusses this in great detail in The Logical Analysis of Psychology, who
ultimately contends that, mental phenomena may exist, but what really matters is to transcribe all
psychological states; be it pain or depression, into physical evidence. Otherwise, it is impossible
to critically examine if someone is in pain or experiencing a certain emotion, because only they
have privy access to their intersubjective experience of that pain or feeling.
First, Hempel defines Behaviorism as the study of physical behavior in response to
environmental changes to critically analyze varying psychological states (Heil p.87).
Subsequently all introspective and nonscientific terms such as feeling and disposition are to
be given less weight and analysis, if at all, since those states cannot be shown or conveyed in
physical terms. This is where the Principle of Verification gets introduced and is used to reject
notions similar to Cartesian dualism. The principle states that a proposition has meaning on the
dependent upon whether the conditions can be verified by physical terms (88). By that same
measure, if a proposition is put forth that has no conditions to verify it (i.e. unable to be subject
to physical test conditions), then the proposition is meaningless and irrelevant (89). What the
Principle of Verification does for logical positivists is simply reinforce their position of refuting
and claim or proposition impervious to revealing scientific physical evidence.
Behaviorists and logical positives both disregard the intersubjective meaning of pain and
immaterial minds because they are not subject to scientific inquiry. For the logical positivist it
seems straightforward to seek out evidence for a position, and if evidence does not present itself

Maman 5
then the proposition is dismissed. This principle is also what allows the positivists to distinguish
Sense from Nonsense. Any new term or concepts emerging such as metaphysics and others
referring to what Hempel calls psychological objects that cannot be confronted with test
conditions are devoid of meaning and nonsensical. So, in order to examine someones state of
pain, the logical positivists would point to any and all physical test conditions as well as
behaviors. For example, in the case of Paul has a toothache, the logical positivists would
point to any conditions that verify the proposition. So Paul could point to his tooth, verbalize
that he has pain there, or doctors could simply examine the physical damage. Something more
subtle such as Mr. Jones experiencing negative feelings or depression can be observed through
physical gestures and also examining neural activity. Hempel also suggests measuring blood
pressure or events occurring in the central nervous system, believing once again that no
meaningful question is free from scientific inquiry.
Inevitably, reducing all mental activity to physical symptoms has raised many objections
to the logical positivist position. But it is a position as an alternative to the Cartesian dualist who
views minds as immaterial substances not subject to any current testing in science. Logical
Positivists prized evidence, and unfortunately for the Cartesian dualist evidence for an
immaterial mind separate from the physical body has still yet to be grounded in evidence.