Philosophy has evolved over centuries. Philosophy contains many ideas, studies, and theories. The subject can be closely related to religion, mathematics, natural science, education, and politics. It was early divided into three major branches, natural philosophy, moral philosophy, and metaphysical philosophy. René Descartes and John Locke are both influential philosophers from the 1600’s.
Descartes questioned whether or not we can be certain that things, including our “self”, exist. He speculated that a thinking person must actually exist, because they are thinking. His way of solving this question brings to mind many inquiries regarding how the thinking mind is casually influenced or effected. He was also a mathematician. Therefore, it didn’t come as a surprise when he sometimes used the metaphor of geometry. Systemizing was a technique he used on all of his beliefs. This helped him determine which ones could be proven, and which ones could be doubted. Descartes claimed that the mind or “I” is a non-extended thing. He believed that the imagination and sensation are faculties of the mind in a weaker sense that intellect and will since they require the body to order to perform their functions. Descartes finally discovers that “I exist” is impossible to doubt, and is therefore absolutely certain. When he discovers this, he then proceeds to demonstrate God’s existence, and that he cannot be a deceiver.
The mind-body problem originated from Descartes. The mind and body can only have its kind of modes. The mind can only have modes of understanding, will, and in some senses sensation. The body on the other hand can only have modes of shape, size, quantity, and motion. Each substance cannot have the same modes as the other. Descartes claims that the mind and body are really diverse in two places. He feels that one can be completely understood without the other. He believed that the mind and body are opposite.
We can clarify two points made by Descartes. One would be that he believed perceptions and are clear and distinct because the mind cannot help but believe them to be true. So therefore they must be true because otherwise God would be a deceiver, which is impossible. In Descartes excerpt from the Sixth Mediation, he states “On the one hand I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in so far as I am simply a thinking, non-extended thing [that is, a mind], and on the other hand I have a distinct idea of body, in so far as this is simply an extended, non-thinking thing. And accordingly, it is certain that I am really distinct from my body, and can exist without it (AT VII 78: CSM II 54).
The second point would be that he knows that God creates the mind and body to where they are being clearly and distinctly understood. This would conclude that the mind cannot exist without the body, and the body cannot exist without the mind. Later on Descartes declares that the nature of the mind is understood to be “quite simple and complete”. He also claims that the nature of the body or extension to be in divisible into parts. From this accusation it can be concluded that the mind and body cannot have the same natures. If this part where true, then the same thing would be divisible and non-divisible, which is impossible. Descartes believed that it nevertheless follows from their respective abilities to be clearly and distinctively understood without each other. God would not create one, without the other one
John Locke was another philosopher from this time era. His theory of personal identity under emphasizes the body, and emphasizes are psychological self. John Locke’s most significant work was the Essay Concerning Human Understanding. His goal was to set out to offer an analysis of the human mind and the acquisition of knowledge. Locke’s emphasis on the philosophical examination of the human mind was a preliminary to the philosophical investigation of the world and its subjects represented a new approach to philosophy. Locke’s insights were that we have to know something about ourselves before we can analyze the world and access it.
Locke alleged that you are no longer the identical person that you were before, if you lose all memory of some part of your life. He distinguished the “man” is the collection of particles of matter or roughly the animal, and the “person" is one's self. Locke believed that personal identity was to be founded on consciousness and not the substance of either the body, or the soul. He supposed that we are all the same person to an extent, and that we are conscious to the future actions and thoughts in the same way that we are conscious to present actions and thoughts. Locke believed that even if a person’s body changes the person actually remains the same. Another one of his theories was that people’s consciousness can be transferred from one soul to another, and that person’s self-identity would transfer with the conscious.
Locke states in his reading the Essay Concerning Human Understanding section fifteen The Body, as well as the Soul, Goes to the Making of a Man, “And thus may we be able, without any difficulty, to conceive the same person at the resurrection, though in a body not exactly in make or parts the same which he had here, – the same consciousness going along with the soul that inhabits it. But yet the soul alone, in the change of bodies, would scarce to anyone but to him that makes the soul the man, be enough to make the same man. For should the soul of a prince, carrying with it the consciousness of the prince's past life, enter and inform the body of a cobbler, as soon as deserted by his own soul, everyone sees he would be the same person with the prince, accountable only for the prince's actions: but who would say it was the same man? The body too goes to the making the man, and would, I guess, to everybody determine the man in this case, wherein the soul, with all its princely thoughts about it, would not make another man: but he would be the same cobbler to every one besides himself.”
As evaluated above we can conclude that Rene Descartes and John Locke had their fair share of differences in their philosophies. Descartes was a rationalist. He believed that knowledge of the world can be gained by exercise of pure reason. On the other hand, Locke was an empiricist. He believed that knowledge of the world comes only through one’s senses. These differences clearly dispute each other’s philosophy.
After researching and reading up on Descartes’s and Locke’s philosophies, I can easily settle with Descartes’s philosophies over Locke’s. I disagree with Locke’s philosophy. I don’t feel that one person’s conscious can be transferred to another person’s soul and body. In my opinion, it’s just simply unethical. He also believed that if a person loses all of their memory, then they are no longer the same person. Technically, yes they are the same person. This philosophy can be observed in many ways. I feel that just because someone may suffer from memory loss, that this does not take away from who they really are. The still have the same body, and the same soul that they have forever had. However, the body may appear different on the outside through aging, but it’s still the same body. I also don’t classify a person being just a “collection of particles”.