Defending Materialism Essay, Research Paper

Defending Materialism

Dualism means the complete separation of the mental universe and the physical universe. In doctrine, it is the theory that the universe is explicable merely as a universe composed of two distinct and reciprocally sole factors: the head and the organic structure. Socrates and Plato are called dualists because they think that head and organic structure are separate and distinguishable substances. Mind is witting and non-spatial and organic structure is spacial but non witting. While separate, the two purportedly interact. Socrates argues that the head and organic structure are dissociable and the psyche is immortal. It is through the oral cavity of Socrates that Plato presents his statement for dualism. The statement contains three parts. First, the harmoniousness analogy is inconsistent with the remembrance statement. Following, the harmoniousness analogy entails that all psyches are every bit virtuous. Last, the harmoniousness analogy can non account for the fact that the psyche can defy the organic structure s enticements and can command the organic structure s behaviour.

Materialism, on the other manus, is a manner that people consider the dealingss between head and affair to be inseparable. We are physical existences and our mental reactions are merely byproducts of a material procedure ; the human being is non, nor has, a non-material facet, but is a strictly physical entity. Materialists believe that the human psyche can non be because the psyche is something mental and when the organic structure dies, the encephalon fails to last every bit good and our construct of psyche no longer exists. I believe that philistinism can be defended and Socrates three expostulations can be disproved utilizing Simmias statement of harmoniousness.

Simmias harmoniousness analogy uses harmoniousness, lyre, and strings to support philistinism. Simmias replies to Socrates, a harmoniousness is something unseeable, without organic structure, beautiful and Godhead in the attuned lyre, whereas the lyre and itself and its strings are physical, bodily, composite, earthly and akin to what is mortal. Then if person breaks the lyre, cuts or interrupt the strings and so insists, utilizing the same statement as you, that the harmoniousness must still be and is non destroyed because it would be impossible for the lyre and strings, which are mortal, to be when the strings are broken, and for the harmoniousness, which is kindred and of the same nature as the Godhead and immortal, to be destroyed before that which is mortal ; he would state that the harmoniousness itself still must be and the wood and the strings must decompose before the harmoniousness can s

uffer If so the psyche is a sort of harmoniousness or attunement, clearly, when our organic structure is relaxed or stretched without due step by diseases and other immoralities, the psyche must instantly be destroyed, even if it be most godly, as are the other harmoniousnesss found in music and all the plants of creative persons, and the remains of each organic structure last for a long clip until they rot or are burned ( Plato 36, 37 ) . This analogy shows the psyche as being mortal, as the wood and strings rot off and are destroyed, so does the psyche.

Socrates provinces that harmoniousness analogy is inconsistent with the remembrance statement. Harmonizing to Socrates, we must at some old clip have learned what we now recollect. Socrates believes that this is possible merely if our psyche existed someplace before it took on this human form. So harmonizing to this theory, the psyche is likely to be something immortal. This statement sounds stable, but Simmias harmoniousness analogy clearly disproves this, as harmoniousness can non happen without the lyre and strings, therefore turn outing that there had to be a lyre and strings in order to make harmoniousness.

The harmoniousness analogy entails that all psyches are every bit virtuous can be disproved by the castawaies in the universe. If each psyche were every bit virtuous, there would non be people like Hitler ( mentioned in talk ) or Jeffrey Dahmer in the universe. It is impossible for every psyche to be harmonized, because they would all move likewise and have the same values. To each his ain harmoniousness, for no one individual is exact.

Socrates concluding expostulation is the harmony analogy can non account for the fact that the psyche can defy the organic structure s enticements and can command the organic structure s behaviour. Socrates believes that the psyche directs the organic structure, as harmoniousness does non direct the lyre. From a materialist s point of position, the organic structure and psyche work together, instead than Socrates belief that the psyche takes over the organic structure. When a human being gets sick, he or she will evidently non move the same as usual. The organic structure has much control over how we act and what we do. The psyche and organic structure are in sync with each other.

The nature of being is a doctrine argument that will go on every bit long as there are people to believe about it. It is up to the person to find whether the head and organic structure are two distinguishable factors and the psyche is immortal, or if the psyche is inseparable from the organic structure and a strictly physical entity. Both statements have stableness, yet it is easy to see that what Socrates says can be disproved through the analogy of Simmias.