Instructions
Overview
According to the doctrine of dualism, the mind is a nonphysical substance. In this way, dualism asserts that the mind is quite different from the physical brain. Moreover, according to a particular brand of dualism referred to as interactionism, the nonphysical mind interacts with the physical body/brain. Thus, for example, when one is thinking about writing this essay, the interactionist holds that our thought processes are in some sense nonphysical in character while still being tied to the brain in necessary ways.
Physicalism, on the other hand, asserts just the opposite of dualism. According to physicalism, the mind is purely a physical substance. Said differently, the mind is the brain. Under this account of the mind-body problem, of which there are different types, all processes that we would typically refer to as mental in character (thinking, doubting, questioning, dreaming, consciousness, unconsciousness) are merely underlying brain processes in action, i.e., particular configurations of neurons firing in a manner that is governed by natural law.
Essay Question: Critically evaluate either the doctrine of interactionism or physicalism. In other words, which view gives a more plausible answer to the fundamental question raised by the mind- body problem? Note that one can examine physicalism as a whole or restrict the scope of your essay to a particular type of physicalism.
Instructions
View the “Essay Writing Guide” attached to this dropbox.
Write and submit a thoughtful, clear and succinct thesis writing assignment of 1000-1500 words, in direct response to the Module 2 assignment above.
Draw directly upon our assigned textbook readings for this Module in carefully crafting your detailed response.
In answering the essay question provided, carefully review, reflect upon, and attempt to integrate the textbook material covered in Chapter 2: Section 2.0-2.4.
Please double-space your submission, include your name at the top of its first page, and be sure to cite all sources quoted or paraphrased from (even if it’s only our textbook). Please take careful note of the above formatting instructions.
Don’t forget to include a bibliography or “works cited” page at the end!
Note*************************** the text book we are using for this class is
(((THE PHILOSOPHICAL JOURNEY, An Interactive Approach, Sixth Edition))
William F. Lawhead
University of Mississippi
If you have access to this book, please use some quotes from it.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
ASSIGNMENT COMPLETED AT https://capitalessaywriting.com
MAKE YOUR ORDER AND GET THE COMPLETED ORDER
Doctrine of Interactionism
(Course Instructor)
(University Affiliation)
(Student’s Name)
(Date)
Introduction
What really is the mind-body problem? Though the doctrine of mind-body problem has boggled the minds of sophists for a while, a number of prepositions have been advanced to explain the problem. The most common alternatives that have been widely accepted are the mind-body dualism and the physicalism. Physicalism asserts that there is no nonphysical aspect of a person, where self is the product of the activities of the body. The mind-body dualism points that though the body and mind are different, they casually interact with each other. The commonly referred version of dualism is the interactionism, which was advanced by Descartes in the 17th century. Although the concept of physicalism and interactionism explain the mind-body problem, interactionism offers more plausible reasons than the concept of physicalism. The doctrine of Interactionism may have gaps and may not be the only doctrine that explains the nature of mind-body problem, however, it offers more powerful and relatable ways I which one can understand the world around them.
Evaluation of the Doctrine of Interactionism
The interactionism doctrine of thinking offers a powerful way in which one can connect the physical body events and the events of the mind. According to (Lawhead, 2014) the body is a physical substance, whereas the mind is a nonphysical thing. As rightly put by Descartes in his preposition about dualism, thinking is dualistic in nature. Human beings possess the body and the soul or mind, which does the thinking. In order for one to make a decision, the mind must generate some form of energy that directs specific organs of the body to perform certain functions. The event provides the dualist with a mindset that they can bring fourth change in the world. The mind is distinctively separate from the body, though it may not be physical in nature. It is from the events of the mind that one can make decisions or one can act on certain stimuli.
A case in example is where a dog backs when one approaches a restricted place. In such an event, when the dog backs, the sound of backing is captured by the ears and relayed to the brain. The mind through electrical energy exchanges triggers some response, which will allow the individual to make a decision, whether to approach the place or retreat. Such is the relationship between the mind and the body that allows humans to make decisions in life. The doctrine does not make the thinker helpless neither does it make them to be vulnerable to the nature’s will, but rather places them on the “steering will”. The doctrine of interactionism also offers more plausible explanation with regard to the mind-body problem over the physicalism in that even the doctrine of physicalism acknowledges the presence of human soul though it disagrees on the presence of physical interaction between the two. The question then would be, if the doctrine………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
