Paste your essay in here.. Uncertainties are nearly inevitable, especially when it comes to discussing philosophical issues. Philosophers attempt to create reason for some of the unknown questions that may have sparked curiosity within their own minds. These curiosities could range from whether or not we exist, to different ways of perceiving things, or asking what the world is that we live in. In particular, philosophers René Descartes, George Berkeley, and Plato have directly addressed some of these issues. Furthermore, other external research has led me to explore the realm of perception, mind, and reality. In this philosophical defense essay, Descartes’ belief that the mind can exist without the body will be refuted, therefore also disproving Berkeley’s concept of solipsism. In addition, Plato’s theory of perception will also be discussed and supported with philosophical reasoning.
In the course, students have been challenged to think outside of “conventional” thinking. Often times, philosophers dig deeper in order to understand and analyze these radical thoughts. While there are plenty of philosophical defenses, the few that have been introduced in the course have forced me to try and understand things from a different point of view. This leads me to my first discussion concerning Plato and perception. In Plato’s Allegory of the Cave he theorizes that knowledge is gained outside of our senses, and the reality of human existence. The allegory envisions the world as a cave, with humans trapped as prisoners. These individuals are bound to a rock, and can only see the stone wall in front of them. Behind the prisoners is a fire with a walkway in front of it. Over time, people have carried things on their heads which make shadows. The prisoners have never seen anything outside of the cave, and since they have never seen any real objects, they perceive these shadows as tangible things. At one point, one of the prisoners escapes from the cave. He is shocked at what he is seeing, as he is seeing the real world for the first time. This makes him realize that the world he has known has been a lie. He returns to the cave and informs the others of his discovery. They do not believe him, and they threaten to kill him if he sets them free. The cave represents the people who believe that knowledge is only what we see and hear in the world. The shadows symbolize the perceptions of people who believe that knowledge is only what is seen. The escapee represents a philosopher who seeks knowledge outside of the senses. Thus, this allegory is used to challenge those “conventional” thinking ways that many people may have. What it tells us about perception can be supported with the symbolisms of each of the story’s components.
Plato’s allegory is used to remind people not to settle for what is known. After reading and analyzing this piece, I am more skeptical than before. As humans, we naturally question things, but what “actually” exists can perhaps be one of the most abiding questions. Do we live in a superficial world? Are there tangible or intangible things that we are unaware of? These questions may sound silly to some. However, to others, especially philosophers, these uncertainties can be persistent.
When discussing perception, this overlaps with Descartes and his way of viewing the mind and body. In his work entitled Meditations he presents the idea of dualism. This means that the mind is viewed separately from the body, the two being distinctly segregated. He does this by saying the essence of body is some sort of an extension, and the essence of mind is thought. In order to support his theory, Descartes has used a term known as radical doubt. Radical doubt happens when one doubts their own beliefs in order to determine which beliefs are actually true. However, there are ideas that challenge this point of view. For example, the body cannot know to move limbs without the mind telling it to do so. The mind has to be able to interact with the body in order to properly function and carry out normal tasks. Another piece of support comes from an argument based upon when the brain is damaged. When damage may occur from any type of trauma, our mental powers are compromised. If our mind and body were separate, our mental powers would not be affected by this physical trauma.
In order to better understand this, I attempted to metaphorically think of the mind-body concept. For example, say your car breaks down and you think your spark plugs are out. When you take it to the repair shop, you simply tell them what you think is wrong. You don’t tell them any deep knowledge of car thermodynamics. If you were to tell them all of this information, it’s not that you necessarily will be wrong. It is something deeper than what we need to explain what’s taking place on the surface. If we can imagine this in terms of the mind-body concept, the mind and body are ultimately the same. The separate distinction of the two is important in practical terms, in the same way that it is useful to talk about spark plugs versus thermodynamics. While this is true, they are still the same thing, giving a sense of mere conceptualization.
Berkeley’s To Be is to Be Perceived is another philosophical work that overlaps with perception and the mind-body dualism. In this piece, solipsism is a concept that is discussed. Solipsism is the view that the self is all that can be known to exist. Berkeley is in denial of the external world. His perception says that what we may usually call physical objects are actually just collections of ideas in the mind. He thought that there were no material things, and our senses determined what exists. Solipsism is Descartes’ quote “I think, therefore I am” taken to the extremes. Take me, for example. If I am the only thing that exists, and the universe is mine, why can I not have whatever I may want in life? Why do I have to type this paper instead of whishing it was already typed for me? To me, it seems as if a solipsist has to be an atheist. If they are the only thing known to exist other than figments of their imagination, then how can there be a God?
Another way to simply refute solipsism is concerning human language. Human language cannot exist without multiple individuals in which you would communicate with. In order to use language, you must actively participate with other language users.
What I find interesting is that solipsism can quite literally be disproved by the mind-body dualism concept. Descartes uses the mind-body dualism and says how our minds and bodies are two separate beings. If solipsism were real, then your body would theoretically not exist. The body would simply be a concept of imagination, just like everything else is (in terms of solipsism). While Descartes did coin the theory of solipsism, he contradicts himself by supporting the mind-body dualism.
In Plato’s allegory, the escaped prisoner sees that what he had always imagined was not real. So, if you are imagining something and it is not real we cannot just make these in our head if this were the case then the prisoners representing blank would