Comparison of two philosophers Locke and Descartes
The philosophical debate of the body and mind is about how the mind and body are either different or similar thing. The human mind concerns consciousness, thought, and mental processes. On the other hand, the body involves physical aspects of the structure of brain and brain neurons. There is a philosophical problem of defining the relationship between mind and body. Whether the body is a component of the mind or the mind is a component of the body. Locke and Descartes put forward theories to describe the relationship between the body and the brain. Descartes claimed human senses cannot be believed and even questioned its existence. Locke held that there is nothing inborn, and all human knowledge is obtained from experience. Locke and Descartes had comparable philosophical positions on mind and body and its meaning to the self and consciousness. The essay will first explore the similarities of Descartes and Locke’s positions, and they consider their differences regarding mind and body as well as the meaning of self and consciousness.
The two philosophers attempted to explain the meaning of self and consciousness and the duality of the human mind and body. Descartes explained the duality of mind and soul by distinguishing between the mind and body. He argued the body and mind have a two-way interaction. He claimed that mind and body are connected through where sensations are transferred. The two are interconnected at the pineal gland. The connection between the mind and body enables a person to recognize the body as his or her own. He pointed out that, “I am not merely present in my body as a sailor is present in a ship, but that I am very closely joined, and, as it were, intermingled with it, so that I and the body form a unit” (Descartes, 116). The Descartes dualism suggests that the body is controlled by mind though it can control a rational mind in situations where human being actions are due to passion. Descartes claimed that the self is a thinking thing with thoughts. He suggested that he was a thinking thing, something that has the capability of doubting, affirming, understanding, denying: willingness and unwillingness, sensory perceptions, and imagination’s (Descartes 82-83).
On the other hand, Locke suggested that the mind and body are separate but interrelated. He distinguished body and mind by claiming that the body is an extended physical substance, whereas the soul is a non-physical substance which thinks (Locke 124). He agreed with Descartes argument about self as something which has the ability to think. However, he failed to concur with Descartes argument that “essence consists solely in the fact that [he is] a thinking thing” (Descartes 114). He pointed out that the self consists of the mind and its body as opposed to separate rational or thinking. Locke had a different view by explaining memory by providing an account as opposed to how Descartes considered human thought at a specific moment (Locke 139). Locke makes a step further and explains one’s identity with respect to the continuousness of consciousness. Unlike Descartes, he allows the mind to control the body actively and also the body to control the mind (Soles 2)
Descartes and Locke have dissimilar concepts about knowledge. Descartes claims knowledge is obtained through the deduction and experience, and it depends on absolute certainty. Indubitable knowledge cannot be acquired from the outside world because it is not possible to obtain it through senses. Therefore, knowledge is obtained from within a person because it cannot be made by experience with the outside world. Also, he considered deductive knowledge as certain because he had a strong belief that intelligence cannot wrongly perform it. The principles of Gods existence and presence of the self are immediately known through intuition. The principles are inborn as well are revealed to people by what he termed as natural light (Descartes 97)
On the other hand, Unlike Descartes believe in the existence of innate knowledge, Locke did not believe there was the existence of innate ideas. He points out that if innate ideas or principle exists, they would be present in children at birth. Moreover, he rejected Descartes argument by claiming if there was innate knowledge, it meant that the ideas of God were inborn. Therefore, the human mind does not have innate principles and ideas, and at birth, the mind is “white paper, void of all characters, without any ideas” (Locke 33). As a result, people acquire knowledge through experience and not natural light.
The Lockean and Cartesian identity theories are similar in that they distinguish the human mind (soul) from the body. Moreover, they describe a personal identity with respect to thinking or thought. Locke describes the self as the body and soul, while Descartes explains the self as only a thinking soul. Locke’s concept of identity does not tend to be a direct rejection of Descartes idea because they are both innate philosophical concepts. Locked concept of identity is borrowed from Descartes, which imply is just an extension of original ideas and not a separate theoretical account.
Locke’s Human understanding essay is not a direct criticism of Descartes ideas. The essay is a different epistemology approach which is not Cartesian. The account was largely Locke’s influence from reading Descartes work. Much of Locke’s concepts and terminologies are borrowed from Descartes philosophical work. Locke borrowed the terminology idea as the way ‘mind perceive in itself’, and that understanding, as well as thought, are the direct perception objects. It is evidenced by Descartes definition of an idea as anything that the mind immediately perceives (Descartes 132).
Moreover, Locke considers the ability of external objects to generate an idea. He provides a distinction in that primary qualities are objects which are inseparable as they belong o an object or are an extension while secondary qualities are objects which are either sensed or perceived. The distinction is similar to what is in Descartes work about wax qualities. Descartes perceives it as having shape, size, motion, duration, number, and substance. The two philosophers claim there is something which distinguishes the human being from animals and machines. Descartes claims machines are superficial, a may tend to imitate human being but with certainty are not similar to people. On the other hand, Locke claims animals have not the capability of generating general ideas because they do not utilize words (Locke 64).
In conclusion, Descartes and Lock are similar in that they attempted to provide answers to the philosophical problem of duality of mind and the body as well as the meaning of the self and consciousness. Another similarity though minor is Locke ideas are based on Descartes work because the work is mainly a direct response to the readings. The difference between the two is Descartes explained the body and mind as a two-way interaction connected at the pineal gland. In contrast, Locke distinguished body and mind by arguing the body is an extended physical substance, whereas the mind is a non-physical substance with thoughts. Finally, both of them do not concur with the meaning of self and consciousness (origin of ideas). They provide contrasting answers in regard to the body and mind as well as the meaning of the self and consciousness.
Works cited
Descartes, René. “Selected Philosophical Writings, transl. by J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff and D. Murdoch.” (1988).
Locke, John. “An Essay on Human Understanding. 1689. Ed. Kenneth P. Winkler.” (1996).
Soles, David E. “The Cambridge Companion to Locke.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 34.2 (1996): 301-302.