Descartes

Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Descartes
In part four of the book Discourse on Method, Descartes claims that both body and mind are separate. He states that “[T]his ‘I,’ that is to say, the Soul by which I am what I am, is entirely distinct from the body” (Descartes 29). In support of this claim, which is known as the Dualism of mind and soul, he ventures broadly into several premises which he narrows down to the doubt argument, in which he focuses on distinguishing false from what is considered truth. In this study, the claim above is analyzed to understand its meaning, the premises, and possible limitations.
The meaning of the claim
In the above claim, Descartes meant that mind is a separate entity from the body in relation to a thinking being. He, therefore, uses a proposition that “I am thinking. Therefore, I exist” (p. 33), meaning that one has to exist to think. Here, Descartes seems to insist on his essence of thought as he questions the nature of the self that he claims to be sure that it exists. He validates his existence with doubt, and by reasoning that he must be thinking being to doubt.
The reasoning used by Descartes to support the claim
The premise that Descartes uses to support his claim on dualism is that of doubt argument. The argument is twofold. First, He felt that as a thinking entity, he can doubt that his body exists since our senses can deceive us especially when we are asleep without them being true. With this argument, he concludes that things are not what we can imagine (or think).

Second, Descartes notes down that it was impossible for him to question his existence if he could think. He, however, imagined himself without a body. These two premises that he can question that his body exists and that he cannot doubt that he existed as a thinking entity are firmly mounted in the excerpt.
“I saw that I couldpretend that I had no body and that there was no world ora place for me to be in, but that I could not for all that pretendthat I did not exist; on the contrary, from the very fact that Ithought of doubting the truth of other things, it followedincontrovertibly and certainly that I myself existed, whereas, ifI had merely ceased thinking, I would have no reason to believe that I existed, even if everything else I had ever imagined hadbeen true” (Descartes 29).
Simply put, Descartes notes that can see or imagine himself in existence without a body but not when without the conscious. He further explains that being conscious requires no place or material property (body). Much importance is given to thinking as Descartes later states that “in order to think, one has to exist” (Descartes 29). This leads to another conclusion he made that the things one conceive as clearly and distinctly are true as opposed to those that one is uncertain. On this, Descartes had earlier developed criteria for determining what can be conceived as true or false. This is by “reject as completely false everything in which I could detect the least doubt” (Descartes 29) and upholding what is certain as true.
Objections to the claim
According to Descartes, the body is divisible into parts and have specific properties that mind does not have. We, therefore, conceive things with our whole mind. However, numerous studies especially those focusing on human behavior agree that some mental illness can be used to support an argument that our mind is divided, the reason behind the multiple personality syndromes. Similarly, theories of conscious and unconscious mind including Sigmund Freud’s suggest that mind is divided consequently influencing human behavior in a certain way. According to Kendra (5), Freud’s theory argues that brain is divided into preconscious, the conscious, and unconscious mind. Lacewing (183) confirms this and gives an example that the divisibility of mind can exist when some parts of the mind fail to communicate correctly to each other leading to functional failure.
A response to the objection
Despite any objection to Descartes’ claim, due to errors or mistakes, as he insisted when he said that, Descartes has established in his reasoning that the mind is not divisible. Therefore, this it is logical to conclude that he meant the non-physical aspect of the mind (mental) and not what scientist can call brain (Creaswood 5), for having physical property. This means that unlike the body that is spatially divided into different things, the mind conceived as one single entity.
This could be the reason Descartes chooses to acknowledge things he is sure as true and others that he can doubt as false. Otherwise, we could have some options of truth for those things we are certain (have evidence), false for those we hold complete doubt (or lacking evidence), and partially true or false. The partial truth or false referring to those things that we are neither certain nor doubting but optimistic about evidence or lack of it before judging as either true or false respectively.
The reason for these differences is an assumption that every part of the mind if divisible influences our conception of things differently from the other. Since partial true does not exist, it is, therefore, logical to agree that the Descartes referred to the indivisible mind and to that can be divided (brain, and which is part of the body) whose underdevelopment or use of drugs contribute to disorders.
Conclusion
In brief, Descartes in his claim meant that the mind is separate from the body. He dwelled on the premise of doubt as well as that of determining what is true or false to support that claim. According to Descartes, he can doubt that his body exists as a thinking being but cannot doubt his existence if he is thinking. He brings up a proposition that I am thinking, therefore, I exist. Consequently, he validates his existence by the ability to conceive and doubt. Notably, Descartes values the thinking being more than any other thing in his meditations. Perhaps the most effective part is the realization that Descartes holds mind as indivisible into different parts the way body is divided. This concept seems to be refuted by many studies that hold that mind can be divided into different sections. It is, however, logical to understand that Descartes meant the mind that cannot be spatially divided. A guess supporting this claim is that if the mind was divisible, we could arrive at three kinds of choices namely the true, false, and partially true.
I agree that the mind and body are not a single entity but distinguishable as separate. However, they have a strong connection that accounts for coordination between the two. In an opinion, the mind and the soul can be likened in that they leave the body after death. Even in bad health, the mind’s functions such as cognitive abilities may deteriorate leading to a concussion that they are connected. Another reason is that we do not acknowledge things as partially true or half-false. Instead, we view options as either true or false based on whether we are sure or we doubt.
Works Cited
Creaswood, Kerry. “Your Brain Is Not Your Mind: True Nature of Consciousness.” Waking Times, 17 June 2016, www.wakingtimes.com/2016/06/14/brain-not-mind-true-nature-consciousness/.
Descartes, René. Discourse on Method. Broadview Press, 1637. Print.
Kendra Cherry. “What Are Freud’s 3 Levels of Mind?” Verywell Mind, www.verywellmind.com/the-conscious-and-unconscious-mind-2795946.
Lacewing, Michael. Philosophy for a Level: Metaphysics of God and Metaphysics of Mind. Milton: Taylor and Francis, 2017. Print.