Well, if I don't, there isn't much to talk about is there. So, yes. I exist. As for the logic, I am going along with Rene Descartes concusion in his Meditations on First Philosophy. After much thought about existance, he concludes:
I am, however, a real thing, and really existent; but what thing? The answer was, a thinking thing.
But what is a thinking thing? It is a thing that doubts, understands, conceives, affirms, denies, wills, refuses; that imagines also, and perceives.
This thinking thing that Descartes describes is called a Soul by the English speaking world. It is a semi-imortal or immortal mind that exists separate from the physical body but it interacts with the physical body. Having a Soul is essential to the concept of the afterlife.
Rene Descartes was a Dualist. And I am right there with him. Although there are many, many, many, philosophical arguments agaisnt Duailsm, I think the arguments for it can withstand the onslaught.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A Practical Philosophy for the 21st Century
About Philosophy
The more research one conducts into philosophical thought, the more one finds that pretty much everything that could be thought about has been thought about and discussed for thousands of years. I don't anticipate launching some new discourse into the meaning of life. The purpose of this site is to lay out a practical philosophy with regards to current issues being faced during the 21st century.
Origins of My philosophy
Most of my philosophy is loosely based on religious texts, gleaned from my own experiences, or taken directly from other philosophers and scientists. If I can't find some other source, I just make of it up using my gut feeling. Of couse, it is all subject to change as needed.
Research
Philosophers
Political Philosophy
Labels
- afterlife (1)
- dualism (1)
- metaphysics (1)
- oracle (1)
- Philosophers (1)
- Quotes (4)
- soul (1)
Other Oracles
Blogging Philosophers
About Me
My Other Blogs
Blogstuff
Copywrite 2007
2 comments:
Damasio is a hack. In desperation to sell a flawed theory, he resorts to the well known trick of trashing someone well respected. Although I have been only able to read reviews of his text, Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain, it appears that he is relying on a slogan ("I am, therefore I am.") to sell his work as opposed to making logical arguments.
It is even more interesting that Damasio studies Phineas Gage, whom after experiencing brain damage is unable to reason. I'm sure if Descartes were around, he might even agree, as Descartes believed that the soul interacted with the body via a gland in the brain. So if you do enough damage to the brain, it has difficulty communicating with the soul/mind.
My first argument against Damasio would to say that the soul has an imperfect connection with the brain/body. If you do enough damage to the brain, the soul simply leaves. I.E. you have a stroke and deprive the brain of oxygen for long enough, the soul leaves and your body dies.
Damasio would be more convincing if he were the one whose brain was damaged or had portions removed, and then wrote a book saying that he could not reason or had no emotion. It might simply be that if particular portion of the brain is removed, that the soul/mind is still thinking just fine, but is unable to make the body execute the necessary actions - whether verbal or physical.
On Damasio: LOL… did you want to wait several months before getting a reply back about Damasio? I’m sure he is good – his resume is packed with credentials. I did the best I could with what little wikipedia had.
On Descartes: He is counted as one of the greatest philosophers of the enlightenment! Enough so that many other philosopher made their name by “disproving” his philosophy! Even Damasio thinks that… he feels strongly enough about Descartes that he will put his name on the front of his book and spend time showing how Descartes was wrong.
Post a Comment