...Aristotle Essay Adnan Ahmad Compare and contrast Aristotle‘s concept of mind with that of Descartes. Introduction In this essay I attempt to show Aristotle’s concept of soul/mind*[1]. Then I compare and contrast it with Descartes’ concept of mind. In order to understand Aristotle’s concepts of mind, I shall consider Aristotle’s De Anima, in which Aristotle mostly concentrates on soul/mind discussion. I will examine the work of Kahn and Sorabji, who both considered Aristotle’s and Descartes’ philosophy in relation to soul and body problem. In order to compare Aristotle’s concept of mind with Descartes’, I am going to introduce Descartes’ most famous philosophical work which involves the question of mind directly, namely hisMeditations. …………………………. …………………………… ………………………………. If we look at Aristotle’s De Anima we can understand that pre-Aristotle thinkers were already concerned with corporeal and incorporeal problems. For example, for Plato soul was an ‘incorporeal’ and immortal thing, but body corporeal and mortal. The first impression we get from reading De Anima is that the mind and body problem was unsolved. Perhaps the resolved problem didn’t satisfy Aristotle. Aristotle claims that an incorporeal thing cannot exist without a corporeal thing. Aristotle’s new theory for solving soul and body problems makes controversial debate among most post-Aristotelian philosophers. Rene Descartes was one of them who rejected the Aristotelian...
Words: 3631 - Pages: 15
...on body and soul identity. (35) The mind-body problem is an ongoing problem in the philosophy concerning the nature of the relationship between the mind, or consciousness, and the physical world. It questions how our mental thoughts are linked to our physical activities. In religion and philosophy, the soul is considered the immaterial aspect or essence of a human being, which is often considered to be synonymous with the mind or the self. In theology, the soul is further defined as that part of the individual which is thought to survive the death of the body. However, this view point isn’t taken by all. Viewpoints on the soul can be separated into monism, dualism and materialistic views. Aristotle is a monist believing that the body and soul are not linked, whereas Dawkins is a hard materialist believing that biology is the key. Aristotle defined the soul, or psyche, as the ‘first actuality’ of the body and argued against it having a separate existence from the physical body, unlike other philosophers such as Plato. Aristotle’s belief was that the difference between a live body and a corpse is the presence of the soul. When the soul dies, so does the body. In his book, De Anima he stated that “the soul does not exist without a body and yet is not itself a kind of body. For it is not a body, but something which belongs to a body.” In Aristotle’s view, full actualisation of a living thing is its soul. The soul is the form and shape of the body. Aristotle argued that...
Words: 1420 - Pages: 6
...I. THE THEORY OF THE IDEAS AND PLATO’S ONTOLOGY I. 1. The ontological dualism The theory of the Ideas is the base of Plato’s philosophy: the Ideas are not only the real objects ontologically speaking, but they are the authentically objects of knowledge epistemologically speaking. From the point of view of ethics and politics, they are the foundation of the right behaviour, and anthropologically speaking they are the base of Plato’s dualism and they even allow him demonstrate the immortality of the soul. Plato defends a clear ontological dualism in which there are two types of realities or worlds: the sensible world and the intelligible world or, as he calls it, the world of the Ideas. The Sensible World is the world of individual realities, and so is multiple and constantly changing, is the world of generation and destruction; is the realm of the sensible, material, temporal and space things. On the contrary, the Intelligible World is the world of the universal, eternal and invisible realities called Ideas (or "Forms"), which are immutable and do not change because they are not material, temporal or space. Ideas can be understood and known; they are the authentic reality. The Ideas or Forms are not just concepts or psychic events of our minds; they do exist as objective and independent beings out of our consciences. They are also the origin of sensible things, but although they are the authentic beings, Plato, unlike Parmenides of Elea, do not completely...
Words: 11604 - Pages: 47
...Tristan Yarbrough PHI 101-802 Unit 1: Reflection Paper Due March 6th, 2017 Page 1 I. Aristotle Aristotle believed that the soul and body aren’t separable, your soul is the structure of the body. The soul runs throughout the whole body, it is the function of the body it is what it does for your body. It controls your movement, perception, and reproduction. He believed the soul and body were two different aspects of the same thing. Aristotle didn’t believe in reincarnation, he believed that the soul was the form of the body and could not exist without it. He believed while you were living on earth your soul was the form and the body was matter, together it was considered a compound. Your soul ran...
Words: 1634 - Pages: 7
...form of animals equipped with supreme functions. We not only have soul which is the principle of life, but we are also believed to have mind or consciousness which is much more functional, divine and peculiar to the soul. But often times, we are unaware of what we are having and how our body operates in our daily life. Therefore, many philosophers, psychologists, religionists or even mathematicians, and sciences have been actively trying to define the nature, attributes and affections of our brain/soul. There are many different views and perspectives on the soul and the mind-body problem, such as materialism, physicalism, dualism, mysterianism and so on… So, how exactly do we understand humankinds, and all living beings as a whole? How exactly do we understand our own self? Do both material and immaterial parts exist? If so, how do they relate to each other? Although most of these questions have convincing answers, I believe we are still in the mystery of defining the true nature of mental phenomena. (1) Thomas Nagel said that: “Conscious experience is a widespread phenomenon. It occurs at many levels of animal life, though we cannot be sure of its presence in the simpler organisms...” His main thesis is that fundamentally an organism has conscious mental states if and only if there is something that it is to be that organism – something it is like for the organism. We can say that consciousness is basically what makes living creatures perceive and think. Without consciousness...
Words: 2479 - Pages: 10
...SOUL The question of the truth and knowledge of soul and its peculiarity in form is a highly debated issue in philosophy. Does the soul exist? How can one find their souls? Since the soul is not physical, can we connect with it? Numerous theories of nature and existence of the soul have come up as an attack on the belief in its existence after death. In his Republic, Plato argues that the soul consists of three basic energies which animate human beings: Reason, Emotion, and Appetite. Reason is given the greatest value, while Emotion and especially Appetite are regarded as the lower passions. The soul that is ordered is governed by Reason, and therefore keeps one’s emotions and one’s appetites under control. The lower passions must submit to the dictates of Reason. According to Plato, the soul is placed inside the body at birth, after it has travelled from the realm of the forms. When it arrives in the body, it forgets the forms which enable a person to be moral and live a meaningful life. Plato’s idea sounds convincing. However, a soul can be many different things depending on where you live, religion or beliefs you adhere to. For me it’s an interchangeable work of some sort of spirit. In fact, not because it sounds so attractive doesn’t mean it exists. That might be the very reason why it was invented in the first place. I for one would love to have a soul. I would love to be assured that some part of me lives eternally after I die or get reincarnated into something else...
Words: 885 - Pages: 4
...Nicomachean Ethics written by Aristotle and Plato’s Meno written by Plato both address the concept of virtue. With the system of Eudaimonism, Plato and Aristotle attempt to arrive at a theory or system or set of moral principles or values dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation. They further go on in applying these principles of conduct in governing an individual or group. Their main concern with conformity to this standard of right is the idea of virtue. They also seem to place one virtue as being of particular moral excellence. The widely accepted definition of Eudaimonism is having a good attendant spirit or a theory that the highest ethical goal is happiness and personal well-being. This definition of Eudaimonism...
Words: 1028 - Pages: 5
...Response #1 In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle defines virtue extensively, and thus relates that definition to the activity of happiness and leading a happy life. Firstly, Aristotle begins to discuss virtue in book two, chapter one, stating, “Virtue, then, being of two kinds, intellectual and moral, intellectual virtue in the main owes both its birth and its growth to teaching (for which reason it requires experience and time), while moral virtue comes about as a result of habit, whence also its name(ethike) is one that is formed by a slight variation from the word ethos (habit)” (87). Virtue appears in two different forms, and that of moral virtue is not one decided by nature, but rather by our habits and how we live our lives. Furthermore,...
Words: 874 - Pages: 4
...words; Meta meaning beyond or after while physicia means physical which refers to the works on matter by Aristotle in antiquity (Statile, et al. 2006). Therefore, it is literally after physics. Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy that is concerned with the understanding and the explanation of the fundamentals of Nature of being and the world (Statile, et al. 2006). It seeks to investigate the principles of reality; state of things as they exist and whether or not they are observable or comprehensible. Aristoterian hylomorphism Aristotelian hylomorphism is a philosophical theory that was developed by Aristotle, which analyzes substances into matter and form. Aristotle theory seeks to understand the inherent quality in matter that a substance conceives as forms (Statile, et al. 2006). Aristotle’s hylomorphism theory, therefore, seeks to relate matter and form, soul and body and substantial form, accidental form and prime matter. This theory has given rise to many debates by scholars as according to this theory; it is workable especially in proximate and non proximate matter. According to the definition of matter and form hylomorphism theory, is not workable with regards to body and soul. Matter and form According to Aristotle, the fundamental question is not “Is X matter?” but rather “what is the matter of X?” (Statile, et al. 2006). Aristotle, therefore, defines the matter of X as its constituents. According to Aristotle hylomorphism theory, something can be matter without...
Words: 2589 - Pages: 11
...introduced to the term “virtue”. Contrary to our definition of virtue, Aristotle’s version of virtue does not only include moral excellence but excellence in all aspects of life. He says that “true politician” will try harder to be virtuous than anything else. The reason for this is because a politician wants their citizens to be upstanding and obey the laws put in place. Virtue is an important concept to Aristotle because human’s ultimate goal is happiness. He says to achieve happiness, we must study “human virtue”. He makes the distinction between a virtue of the soul and a virtue of the body. Happiness is a virtue of the soul so politicians must be knowledgeable of the human soul to a...
Words: 549 - Pages: 3
...Umstead Plato and Aristotle, arguably two of the most influential Greek philosophers, discussed their differing views on virtue extensively throughout many of their works. Although they agree that virtue is a desirable characteristic that will lead to happiness, the ultimate good, there exists between the two philosophies salient differences. While Plato believes only philosophers are capable of true, inherent virtue, Aristotle believes all men can be virtuous with practice and dedication. GREAT. WAY TO GET TO THE POINT. BE SURE TO MENTION WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE ARGUING THAT VIRTUE IS INTRINSICALLY GOOD. HAVE IT SMACK ME IN THE FACE IT'S SO OBVIOIUS. (LIKE THAT TYPO). Plato’s Republic contains one of the greatest recorded discussions on the nature of justice. His definition of justice can be interpreted today as virtue, or the proper working of the soul. Plato argues in this work that virtue is inherently good only when it is manifest in the perfectly ordered soul of the philosopher. This philosopher is born just and inherently good, thereby making him the only individual capable of loving and seeking after virtue completely. …..... I'M GUESSING THIS ATTACHES TO THE NEXT PARAGRAPH? AND I'M NOT SURE HOW I FEEL ABOUT “BORN JUST”. REMEMBER, IT ISN'T “INBORN” BUT IT IS NATURAL. YOU AREN'T BORN THAT WAY. YOU TEND TOWARDS IT, THOUGH. Only through virtue, or justice as he calls it, can a man receive happiness, and this hints at the inherent goodness of virtue. A man’s soul will only be...
Words: 1667 - Pages: 7
...Two Views of Soul: Aristotle and Descartes* THEODORE TRACY, SJ. What first attracted my interest to a possible comparison was the realization that, unlike Plato, both Aristotle and Descartes shared the view that, first, there is but a single soul and, second, that this soul operates principally through a single specific bodily organ. Given his own understanding, I believe Descartes could agree totally with Aristotle's statement that the soul's "essential nature cannot be * This paper was originally presented at the University of South Carolina in April 1981' as a contribution to a symposium on "Soul and Mind in Ancient Philosophy," organized by Professor Rosamond Kent Sprague. 248 Illinois Classical Studies, XI corporeal; yet it is also clear that soul is present in a particular bodily part, and this one of the parts having control over the rest":' dfiXou 6ri ovx oihv r' tivai adua rffv ovtriau ocvrfiq, aW 5fi(t)c, Sri 7' iv tlvl tov (TUifiaToq inrapxii^ nopiw (t>avtpbv, kcu iv tovtw tivi twv ixovruiv bvvafiiv eV roJq nopioic,. {Parva Naturalia 467b 13- 16) For Aristotle, as we know, that particular controlling organ is the heart. In his treatise On Memory, for example, Aristotle declares that in animals, including man, "the source and control center {otpxvY of both the sensitive and nutritive soul must be in the heart": apayKT) Koi rrfc, ataQr]TiKr\c, kou rriq dpeirTLKfic, ^vxri<i ^v ry Kapb'ux rffv otpxw etW. {PN 469a5-7) Again, in the De Partibus...
Words: 8048 - Pages: 33
...future of the perfect society. To this fact he gives an ingenious riposte, such societies will be under the guardianship of the offspring of the current guardians. That means what the future society will be under the guardianship of a not skill but the benefits of inheritance. In such a society, dissatisfaction is possibly the way of the day. Plato maintained that for dissatisfaction an understanding of the nature of the human being is the answer. That is, people are naturally different and they have where they fit in the society. In such a situation, they will be able to rule the society. A perfect society, I believe, is one that is distinctive by leaders who have the interests of the society at hand. That is, a society under the reign of guardians who are in favor of the members of the society and their needs. A society that is simply having rulers who have inherited power is liable to doom. This is because, in most cases, such kinds of people not only lack the wisdom to rule, but they are also corrupted by the benefits of inheritance that they become nefarious with power. However, in a situation where someone who has inherited power is able to stand for the wishes of the people then can lead a perfect society. The wishes of the governed should be the guiding factor here. It defines what the society stands for and what it aims to achieve, anybody going against such things is in contravention to the core...
Words: 1223 - Pages: 5
...art and science. Wisdom however, consists of understanding the fundamental principles and causes of life. Moreover, Aristotle argues that the ultimate goal of life is “living well,” which is happiness. There are multiple activities we participate in as human beings either to stay alive such as eating, drinking, exercising, or to make life easier or better somehow. For example, thinking, learning, and educating ourselves is not just to stay alive but most importantly to live an enhanced life. To Aristotle, “living well” is the ultimate goal of life, because we participate in several physical and mental activities in our life time in the purpose of fulfilling the requirements that leads us to that well life, but not in the purpose of achieving further goals in life. According to Aristotle, “All men by nature desire to know.” There are a lot of things that we do as human beings, such as feelings, thinking, and reasoning. These are things we desire in this world or believe that they are good in seeking some goals in life. Everyone desires to know or to understand something in his or her lifetime. Everyone is searching for particular rational explanation of something. And we do these things either to stay alive or to “live well”. To Aristotle, living well is happiness and that is what we all are seeking. Happiness to Aristotle is the ultimate goal of this life, it is what all human beings...
Words: 1152 - Pages: 5
...happiness is the end all be all to our society. It is unlikely that we will do anything unless it makes us happy. Because happiness and its definition are so widely debated and thought provoking, it is no wonder that a mind such as Aristotle undertakes the task of writing about happiness. What we come to find in Book One Nicomachean Ethics is that Aristotle ultimately defines happiness as function. However, in this definition comes two major questions: Why does function equate to happiness and how can we even be sure that humans have a function? In this essay I will prove that happiness is the end that human function strives towards, and, by showing why Aristotle’s argument does not evoke the fallacy of composition, that humans...
Words: 1392 - Pages: 6
