Do we make a 'category mistake' by seperating the two?
2007-03-19 12:55:24 · 8 answers · asked by Sisyphus 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Probably - the early Philosophers thought it was necessary to separate the two - since one (the mind) in the form of the soul was thought to carry on after the body died.
Of course, with the advent of modern science and those findings, it has been determined that the mind passes away with the passing of the body - your mind becomes pure nothingness while your body becomes the very star stuff (dust) that founded its origin. (with special thanks to Carl Sagan)
Not comforting - I know, but that is what faith is for, to make you think that death will bring something else...
Or as Socrates said: Death (of the mind and body) is an inevitable something of which we know nothing...
2007-03-19 13:12:49 · answer #1 · answered by dremblewedge 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. The two should definitely be separated. The hypochondriac, for example will truly believe he/she is ill with something and sometimes even be able to produce some of the symptoms. Sometimes after a dreadful incident a child will be unable to talk, yet physically there will be no reason for it and one day the child might start talking again.
When a person is gravely ill the mind will cut back on various bodily functions to conserve energy.
2007-03-27 07:38:07 · answer #2 · answered by don n 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The jury's still out on that one, but I'm betting on a linguistic problem.
2007-03-19 12:58:39 · answer #3 · answered by knight2001us 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not really. Until we know everything about neurology and psychology and everyone speaks in scientific terms for some reason the mental and the physical are completely different.
2007-03-19 12:59:57 · answer #4 · answered by shmux 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes. they're aspects of a unitary system seen from two different points of view, both of which have explanatory force. the difference is in the description and the point of view, each point of view captures an aspect of the one unitary phenomena. the different points of view are not reducible to each other nor are they different substances so it's not a question of dualism. we start from wholism and abstract out to the perspectives and aspects.
2007-03-19 14:32:56 · answer #5 · answered by Kos Kesh 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Linguistics have always been a brick wall for man in general for man... it's what defines us... language that is.
2007-03-19 13:31:39 · answer #6 · answered by iamjustbored10 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, we definitely should separate them.
2007-03-27 07:56:50 · answer #7 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What exactly is the "problem"? If they (or it) works, who cares if it's singular or plural!
2007-03-19 14:36:58 · answer #8 · answered by Emmie 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋