- First Step: reconstruct the premises and conclusion of the Sixth Meditation argument that there is a real distinction between mind and body. The relevant stretch of text is here: THIS MEANS TO EXPLAIN WHAT HE IS ARGUING (first 2 pages)
First, I know that all the things that I clearly and distinctly understand can be made by God such as I understand them. For this reason, my ability clearly and distinctly to understand one thing without another suffices to make me certain that the one thing is different from the other, since they can be separated from each other, at least by God. The question as to the sort of power that might effect such a separation is not relevant to their being thought to be different. For this reason, from the fact that I know that I exist, and that at the same time I judge that obviously nothing else belongs to my nature or essence except that I am a thinking thing, I rightly conclude that my essence consists entirely in my being a thinking thing. And although perhaps (or rather, as I shall soon say, assuredly) I have a body that is very closely joined to me, nevertheless, because on the one hand I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, insofar as I am merely a thinking thing and not an extended thing, and because on the other hand I have a distinct idea of a body, insofar as it is merely an extended thing and not a thinking thing, it is certain that I am really distinct from my body and can exist without it. (Modern Philosophy, p. 64, left column).
Save your time - order a paper!
Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlinesOrder Paper Now
- Second Step: evaluate this argument. (Another two pages)
- If you think this is a good argument, you can either 1) offer further support for the argument or 2) present and explain a possible objection to this argument and explain why the objection fails.
- If, however, you think this is a bad argument, present an objection to the argument and explain exactly why it succeeds in undermining Descartesâ€™s argument. (For example, you could formulate an objection based on Elisabethâ€™s worry that Descartes cannot explain how an immaterial mind and a material body can causally interact. If you choose to discuss Elisabethâ€™s worry, you must refer to what Elisabeth says in her correspondence with Descartes.)
Your paper should be at least 4 (but no more than 5) double-spaced pages. Use 12pt Times (or similar) font and standard (~1 inch) margins.
Make sure to be specific in explaining how the argument works and in evaluating it. If you are giving an objection, say which premise or inference of the argument the objection targets. If you are supporting the argument, make sure it is clear how what you say supports Descartesâ€™s argument. Focus on what is essential, and do not add extraneous details just to make your paper longer.
PREMISES TO BE INCLUDED IN THE RECONSTRUCTION:
1. if I can clearly and distinctly understand A is B, then it is possible that A is B
2. If I can clearly and distinctly understand X without Y, the God can separate them and so that X and Y are distinct things
3. I exist and my essence is that of a thinking thing and nothing else.
4. I have a body
5. I have a clear and distinct idea of myself as merely a thinking thing, not extended
6. I have a clear and distinct idea of body as merely an extension, not a thinking thing.