The+Mind+and+Body+Relation

There is a clear difference between your "mind", or what internally represents you, and your "body", or what it is that externally represents you. For one, it is easy to specify //where// your body is and //what// your body is, but not so much so your mind. This suggests a difference between the two. Given this distinction, it becomes a problem determining //the nature// of the mind and body relation. For instance, it is not clear how the mind relates to the body. Does the mind control the body like a pilot steers a ship? How can the mind and body possibly interact given their different/distinct natures? These are the issues that surround the mind and body relation.

=
Descartes maintains that because our senses sometimes deceive us, then we must have no recourse to them if we are to discover knowledge that can be held with certainty. Instead, says Descartes, we must rely on human reason alone in our quest for genuine knowledge. This use of reason alone, without reference to human sense, is known today as "Rationalism," and Descartes is known as the "Father of Rationalism." ======

=
In his Meditations, Descartes discounts the value of empirical knowledge, and he claims to have dispensed with all of his previously held notions, at least, for the purpose of his experiment in seeking reliable knowledge that can be held with certainty. He claims to have "detached his mind from his body," and he asks the reader to follow his reasoning as he begins his pursuit. Descartes claims that he is starting with a "clean slate" of mind with no knowledge whatsoever, and his goal is to discover whether anything can be grasped and discovered. In this way, Descartes sets himself up as a kind of moderator, or an impartial, disinterested and neutral judge with respect to the detection of truth. Here, the reader might have many objections and concerns about whether Descartes can fairly be said to be starting with a clean slate of mind resembling the tabula rasa model that Aquinas and other great philosophers have argued for, but we will address those concerns in a later section, and for the time being allow Descartes to present his case. ======

=
 It is worth noting that Descartes, a life long Roman Catholic, did not intend to actually discard his previously held opinions. On the contrary, he proposed to retain those opinions if they met the scrutiny of the principles that he made for his test of validity. Descartes’ four principles are as follows: 1. Accept nothing as true except clear and distinct ideas that cannot be doubted. 2. In order to arrive at reliable conclusions that can be held with certainty, divide each problem into many simpler parts, and test each part, rather than the problem as a whole. 3. Proceed in order from the simplest or easiest parts first, gradually working toward the complex without jumping to the complex. 4. Make complete and comprehensive surveys and checks to make sure that nothing has been overlooked or omitted. According to Descartes, by following these principles, we can arrive at certainty in matters pertaining to metaphysics and philosophy, just as we can arrive at certainty in mathematics. ======

Problems with the //Cogito//
== Thomas Hobbes believes that it is premature to single out thought as the main foundation of proving existence -- he suggests that "I am walking, therefore I am" is equally valid according to Descartes' line of argument. In other words, what we //do// is not necessarily what we //are//. ==
 * 1) Descartes claim is that what I //do// is what I //am//
 * 2) What I do is only part of who I am, not my essence.
 * 3) Thus, Descartes' claim is false.

Descartes, however, counters this by pointing out that it is possible to doubt that you are walking, while you cannot doubt that you are thinking (for by doubting your own thoughts, you are still thinking). It is also the case that if the //cogito// is understood to be the "given," then thought is not only an activity, but an immediately given part of us. Thus, premise (1) is false.

The //cogito//, understood as a given, suggests that mind is not spatial:
 * 1) The //cogito// includes all experience, thought, etc.
 * 2) We arrive at the conclusion of our existence only by intuitions given to us as part of our thought (rather than by argumentation)
 * 3) Any piece of knowledge arrived at through intuition must be a necessary truth. Thus the //cogito// ("I exist as a thinking thing") is a necessary truth.
 * 4) Thus the //cogito// is not spatially extended.

Bill Brewer


=**Brewer’s Argument:**=

1. Bodily awareness is intrinsically spatial: the apparent location of sensation is as essential to its very nature as its purely qualitative feel and is in no way derived from any intrinsically nonspatial variation in it. 2. This spatial location of sensation comes to light only as one is aware of one’s body as determinately extending into and filling certain regions of the perceived physical world. 3. This awareness of one’s body as filling physical space both rests on, and, more important, provides intrinsic spatiality in virtue of, the setting of bodily sensations in particular body parts.

=Problems With Brewer's Argument:= Brewer rejects Descartes’ idea that bodily sensations, like an itch, relate us to our bodies indirectly. Brewer says that bodily sensations are intrinsically spatial. However, how would Brewer explain the phenomenon whereby a recent amputee feels an “itch in his leg,” yet the leg that he feels the itch in is no longer a part of his body? Brewer maintains that sensations, such as an itch, should be considered to be raw data, whereby Descartes says that raw data should be data that cannot be doubted. As Descartes states, the senses can be deceiving. In the case of this amputee, the senses deceived him into thinking that he has a leg. If the itch was raw data, I think we would conclude, incorrectly, that the presence of an itch demonstrates the presence of a leg. To me, this example indicates a problem with Brewer’s argument.

**Response (Pro-Brewer):** = = Although it would seem that the sensation of an itch on a nonexistent leg could not be spatial, this is far from the truth. This sensation is not an indirect relation to our body, in that it takes place in the brain. Of course the medium through which the "itch" is felt is in a nonexistent leg, but the origin of the "itch" itself comes from the brain. Therefore, the itch is spatial.

Also for clarification, the itch in no way deceives an amputee into believing he has a leg again. It is simply a sensation caused by malfunctioning neurons in the cortex, that the amputee has to rehabilitate from. This is actually a perceptual flaw and not a sensory one, a distinction that descartes fails to consider.

= Reaction to Pro-Brewer Response: =

Even if one agrees with the conclusion that the imaginary leg itch originated in the brain and is therefore spatial, there still exists a problem with Brewer’s argument. Brewer suggests that this itch should be considered raw data. This raw data is leading to an erroneous conclusion, that there is an actual leg that exists in the physical world and this leg is producing the itch. Whether or not the itch is indeed spatial (because it originates in the brain) is not the entire point; the deeper point is that what Brewer considers to be raw data is not reliable in this instance. I must side with Descartes’ view that raw data should not be able to be doubted. If raw data is not dependable, then any conclusions drawn from such data are suspect as well.

Se**cond Response to Pro-Brewer:**
Although it may be argued that the itch takes place in the brain, it may also take place within the mind. Considering the separation between mind and consciousness, there may still be a lack of spatiality in the sensation. Along with this, according to the argument Glenney handed out in class brings forth the possibility that C-fibers aren't even firing during the pain, making this a purely conscious-oriented experience, not an experience of the mind, and therefore detached from spatiality. Of course, this all depends on wether or not you believe that the brain is attached to the conscious experience.

Phantom Limb Pain