Body soul destinction Essay

Religious philosophy hatful offer no firm record for a tubercle in the midst of near unrivalledify and sense. Discuss. world being appear to prolong both a torso and a intelligence, the form which is related to somatogenetic movements and appearances. And the theme which relates to feelings and emotions, qualia. M both philosophers then brand name a distinction between the wit and remains, the dualist meet that a psyche is made of both separate substances. On the opposite mitt, some philosophers harbour a monist/ materialist visit that the capitulum and the body atomic number 18 the same substance. This is a bellicose argona of philosophy, and has cr take ined a debate known as the see, body problem. much(prenominal) philosophers as Plato take a dualist look and try to offer designate to suggest a distinction between the body and thought. Plato saw the body and understanding as deuce separate entities. The soul that most closely resembles the worsh ipful and immortal. While the body resembles the hu small-arm and mortal, which is endlessly ever-changing and pile be broken down. Plato was not attempt to suggest the soul was perfect as it get together the body which it is inhibited by, just, he explains that by fetching c ar of the soul the somebody fuck take on knowledge. Plato used tell such as the institution of the forms. He suggested that by taking cargon of the soul and ignoring physiologic pleasures the soul bear return to the peeleds of the forms when the body dies. The narrate of Platos conjecture can be seen familiar.For the body to get it essentialiness obtain its basic needs such as food, breeding and animal(prenominal) pleasure. On the opposite hand for the psyche to be stimulated it has other needs that argon met through deep thought and learning. However, on that point is a flaw to Platos guess, how can you have two completely different substances that are the same involvement? Platos the ory suggests the body and soul can work together to achieve a higher(prenominal) level of existence, but if the body and soul are completely different thither is no evidence to suggest they would be compatible.Another dualist, Aquinas took a to a greater extent ghostly view of dualism. He believed that the body and soul were separate and described the soul as that which animates the body or anima. According to Aquinas, the soul operates severally of the body. Aquinas believed the completely things that are divisible into separate decay. The soul is not divisible and indeed on this basis of Aquinas argument it is able to survive stopping point. However, through the link with a particular mankind beings body the soul becomes an individual so nevertheless when the body dies the soul that departs has an immortal existence. induction for unearthly views on the soul come from the bible. deep down the saucy testament, in that respect are stories of Jesus resurrection that sugges t dualism. Within one particular story Jesus disciples are walking to Emaus. Along the agency they are united by a man, it is only when they arrive at Emaus and offer the man a place to eat and stay that he reveals himself as Jesus. This supports the dualist view as firstly, it proves that the soul is immortal and lives on after dying, and second that the soul is separate from the body as the man who claims to be Jesus appears to be unrecognisable implying he has a different physical appearance. For Christians this will subroutine as firm evidence that there is a body soul distinction, however for those who are not Christian the evidence may not be so reliable.Cartesian duality formed by Rene Descartes, describes the mind and body as being separates and is found on the phrase I think thusly I am. Descartes explained that feelings and sensations cannot be set physically. He authorized that everything non physical is in the mind and therefore must be distinct from the body. T he mind harmonise to Descartes is non spacial and is distinct from material and bodily substances.He suggested that everything has characteristics and that the mind and bodys characteristics are different therefore hey must be separate. For example a dimension of the mind may be cognisance, whereas the body has more aesthetic qualities such as height pretentiousness etc. Descartes evidence is found on the supposal that we can live without the body. He concluded that the body has the job of performing physical activities however, it is the mind that contains our identity. For Descartes the mind is I, that we can live without the body as the mind makes us who we are. Descartes took the ghostlike view that after our death the soul is able to continue and be with God. A mans soul is that to which the pure intellectual properties of a man belong. Richard Swinburne developed a dualist view found on the soul being durable and indivisible. Swinburne suggested that is a logical pos sibility for a soul to exist after the body dies, as the soul lives on. The soul according to Swinburne is linked with mental processes and action and its independent from the body. Evidence for Swinburnes theory comes from near death experiences.In many instances commonwealth have claimed to have had near death experiences whereby their paddy wagon have stopped during surgery and yet they have reported detailed accounts of what happened during the time they were clinically dead. For some this is evidence for consciousness, however if the body and soul is one entity this would be impossible. This therefore implies that there is something that lives on when the physical body is dead, for dualists this would be the soul. On the other hand although the details of the experiences seem to be accurate there is no proof that the experiences may not be caused by other physical phenomena.On the other hand Dawkins, a biological materialist would disagree with the idea that the soul and the body are separate substances. Dawkins bases his theory on evolution and genetics. He would reject any concept of an eternal soul and therefore rejects dualism. roughly of Dawkins work includes the selfish gene and the blind watchmaker Within these he rejects any idea of the religious view of dualism and within the selfish gene he explains that humans are a lucky casualty and that all life is opportunistic and humans are merely genetic mutations with the need to mindlessly replicate. Dawkins does not deny human dignity and accepts the complexity of human life to be able to contemplate the origins of human life.The evidence for Dawkins theory of biological materialism is based on DNA. Dawkins explains DNA as a ordinance of instructions that is made up of millions of strands of genetic information. Genes according to Dawkins program who a somebody is, and it is DNA that by the piece creates what a person looks like as intimately as their personality. For Dawkins both the mind and body are projectled by the DNA and therefore he suggests that there is no need for a soul. Although Dawkins theory is based on a posteriori evidence and it has been proved that certain(a) genes decide certain parts of a persons characteristics there is yet no proof to suggest that genes make up the whole of a someones personality and therefore it could be seen that there may be something else, this may be the soul.John chawbacon has formed a view of religious materialism. He stated that humans are one multiform being, one substance. His theory the replica theory he realised from a religious point of view the problem was continuity. In life after death how can someone be the same person without their body. Therefore unsophisticated suggests that there must be some kind of replica.This replica is the same person however, whilst they cannot exist at the same time. According to Hick at the same time that when a person dies a replica of them is created by God. This is a way of preserving personal identity after death. The evidence for religious materialism is based on the resurrection of Jesus. Some accounts during the new testament describe Jesus after the resurrection and was cognise by followers before ascension. From a religious view this is evidence for the replica theory as it appears that Jesus died and when he came back had the same physical appearance as well as the same personality.Identity theory throw ups forward a materialist view of the soul. Identity theory is against behaviourism and suggests that the mind and the mind are in the same place. In the card, consciousness is generated as well as the other physical processes we link with the brain such as movement. Evidence for this is ensnare foreward in the philosophy files. Within the admit and analogy explains how if you were to look in the brain you would be able to locate an area that is stimulated and that thoughts must be generated in this area. We already know only 10% of the b rains capacity is used consciously and therefore it is a logical assumption that our mind is located within the brain. An analogy for this is that a woman can be a mother, a daughter and a sister etc. The same person can have many functions, it is therefore the same for the brain which as well as having the functions we already recognise such as controlling physical activity, public speaking and controlling bodily functions it can also control the mind.Overall, although religious philosophy offers an explanation for the body soul distinction it is based on little empirical evidence. For those who already follow the religion it may pit in with their beliefs however, for those who are atheist of follow another religion the evidence that it uses makes little logical sense. Such dualists views as Plato where the assumptions are based on everyday life may be more appropriate, however there is still little empirical evidence to prove the theory. On the other hand materialists put fore w ard convincing arguments based on scientifically testable theories i.e. Dawkins. But nevery arguments yet put copious evidence fore ward to either prove their views or disprove that of others. Therefore the direction Religious philosophy can offer no firm evidence for a distinction between body and soul may be considered as correct, however there is not yet enough evidence to suggest that religious views of dualism cannot be true.