I believe that dualism. Dualism - what is it in psychology, philosophy and religion? Dualism in religion, philosophy and physics

The current version of the page has not yet been checked

The current version of the page has not yet been reviewed by experienced contributors and may differ significantly from the one reviewed on February 20, 2019; checks are required.

Gnoseological (epistemological) dualism is also known as representationism - a philosophical position in epistemology, according to which our conscious experience is not the real world itself, but an internal representation, a miniature virtual-real copy of the world.

Examples of epistemological dualism are being and thinking, an object and an object “given in feelings” (English sense datum) and things [ what?] .

A theory that emphasizes the opposition of soul and body. It is not reduced to the dualism of mind and body.

Metaphysical dualism in philosophy considers the use of two insurmountable and heterogeneous (heterogeneous) principles to explain the whole of reality or some of its broad aspects.

Examples of metaphysical dualism are God and the world, matter and spirit, body and mind, good and evil. Manichaeism is the most famous form of metaphysical dualism.

Ethical dualism refers to the practice of absolute evil and exclusively to a specific group of people who ignore or deny their own ability to do evil. In other words, ethical dualism basically depicts the existence of two mutually hostile things, one of which represents the origin of all good, and the other of all evil.

The problem of mind and body is an ongoing problem in philosophy of mind and in metaphysics, regarding the nature of the relationship between mind (or consciousness) and the physical world.

Another form of dualism, which does not recognize the existence of a special spiritual substance, is dualism of properties (qualities). According to the dualism of properties, there is no spiritual substance, but the brain, as a material formation, has unique, special properties (qualities) - which give rise to psychic phenomena.

Epiphenomenalism denies the causal role of mental entities in relation to physical processes. Such mental phenomena as intentions, motives, desires, perceptions have no effect on physical processes and can be considered as side, concomitant processes - epiphenomena - in relation to the causal events of neural interactions occurring in the brain. Thus, mental phenomena - this is how a person feels the events of neural interactions that determine his behavior - and are not a cause in themselves.

Predicate dualism asserts that it takes more than one predicate (when we describe the subject of judgment) to understand the world, and that the psychological experience we go through cannot be redescribed in terms of (or reduced to) the physical predicates of natural languages.

Prophetic dualism (also known as symbolic physicalism) argues that consciousness is a group of independent properties that emerge from the brain, but it is not a separate substance. Therefore, when matter is organized appropriately (that is, the way human bodies are organized), psychic properties appear.

Term dualism has been used since 1700 to characterize the Iranian doctrine of two spirits and was understood as recognition of two opposite principles... Subsequently, scholars have come to the conclusion that dualistic myths are widespread and have many variations at all cultural levels and in many religions.

Although ditheism / bitheism implies moral dualism, they are not the same, as bitheism / ditheism implies (at least) two gods, while moral dualism does not imply any "theism" at all.

Ditheism / bitheism in religion does not necessarily imply that it cannot be simultaneously monistic. For example, Zoroastrianism, being a prominent representative of dualistic religions, contains at the same time monotheistic features. Zoroastrianism never preached overt monotheism (like Judaism or Islam), being in fact an original attempt to unify polytheistic religion under the cult of one supreme God, who argued that the Old and New Testaments were the work of two different warring gods, neither of which was higher than the other (both were the First Principle, but of different religions).

The duality of the world, which is the interaction of the two polarities behind the created universe (light and darkness, good and evil, etc.), is reflected in many symbols. The most famous of them is the yin-yang symbol.

Many occult magic symbols abound with ideas of opposing light and darkness, but the essence of them is the same all the time: light (yang) and darkness (yin) always return, following each other, and give rise to what the Chinese call "Ten Thousand Things", then there is a created world.

Dualism is a teaching that contains an understanding of the existence of two independent principles. Their duality is expressed in spiritual and material incarnations. Dualism in philosophy shows that the material principle plays the role of a logical continuation of the created world, and is responsible for the physical existence of the entire world. The spiritual principle is presented in the form of a certain projection of the will of God, and in some works, even its very essence. It is from this that the understanding of the soul appears as something like the rebirth of the divine, which is inherent in every person.

Dualism in philosophy main features

In the history of thought, the word "dualism" has been used in different ways. In general terms, the main idea is that there are only two principles. So, in theology, a person is called a dualist who speaks about good and evil or about God and the devil as independent and equal in power. A dualistic philosophy that includes several concepts can be considered as a definition that is the complete opposite of monism, whose theory speaks of only one principle. And in philosophy, dualism plays the role of theory, which indicates the differences between consciousness and the brain. Since common sense tells us about the existence of bodies in a physical shell, it is allowed to think that materialistic monism is the “default position”. Therefore, during discussions, dualism is usually first presented with the assumption of the reality of the physical world, and then the arguments are briefly considered that explain why consciousness is not able to remain simply as part of this world.

History of dualism

Dualism is the opposite of the concept of "mental" or "bodily", but in different periods of history it was mental objects that fell into the spotlight. In medieval times, the thought was admitted that materialistic explanations cannot be applied to intelligence. Descartes, however, stated that the main enemy of materialist monism is consciousness, which was recognized as a phenomenal consciousness or sensation.

During the teachings of Plato, it was believed that real living substances are eternal ideas, of which physical bodies are imperfect copies. And these ideas grant intelligence and are the foundation of comprehensibility. In one of his works "Phaedo," the philosopher Plato says that the soul is immortal, but it remains important that the intellect retains its immateriality of the idea, as a result of which the intellect is closely connected with the ideas comprehended by it. Because of such a strong connection, the soul wants to quickly leave the physical shell and live among ideas. But the main problem with Platonic dualism was that the soul is contained in the body, and it does not have a clear explanation of how the soul is connected with the body. Because of their apparent difference, this connection becomes mysterious.

Aristotle, unlike Plato, said that the nature and properties of things exist in physical things. This made it possible for Aristotle to explain how the soul and body are one, and applied the thesis "the soul is the form of the body." His teachings said that the human soul is his nature. This explanation makes the soul one of the body parts. In his books, Aristotle pointed out that the intellect, which is part of the soul form, has obvious differences from all its abilities due to the absence of a bodily organ. Without a material organ, recognize the activity of the intellect as intangible. This explanation is much closer to modern dualism than the teachings of Plato.

Desacralization

It is worth noting that the philosophy of dualism claims that the material and spiritual worlds are not interconnected. Each of them exists in parallel with each other, and one does not depend on the actions of the other. Thanks to this, a person stands out from the surrounding world and becomes closer to the creator of the world. Dualism also adheres to the Christian concept that God created the first man in his own image.

But at the same time, one should not overlook the fact that dualism in modern philosophy plays the role of a special method of desacralization of general knowledge in philosophy. This is getting rid of the excess of religious views and Catholic teaching. Initially, the very definition of dualism was invented by the philosopher and mystic from Germany Christian Wolf, and theoretical ideas were created by B. Spinoz and R. Descarte.

The geometry of being

As Descartes believed, the world is a division into parallel worlds. These were existing things and things of the mind. They cannot be brought together because they exist in different coordinate systems. Extension and physicality depend on the first, which forms the general geometry of the whole world. The second world is responsible for the embodiment of the soul and its leadership of the individual consciousness. In his later writings, Descartes described the world of existing things as nothing more than a projection of the spirit of God that lives in every person.

Main directions

Dualism in philosophy is usually divided into three areas:

• Epistemological. Met in conversations and empiricists, and each of them in his own way understood the role of feelings in cognition. The empiricists revered the experience accumulated by the sensory path, for which the senses and sensations were responsible. Rationalists argued that everything is built on the primary rational theoretical knowledge of the material world. They saw not the soul as the main instrument, but the mind, which is the hallmark of each of the people.
• Anthropological. This direction indicates the spiritual and physical form of a person. This idea belongs, but it was in Christian teachings that they began to talk about it.
• Ontological. Such dualism surpasses all the ideas of Plato, who spoke about the corporeal and ideological world.

Despite the differences, all three directions converged on one thing: knowledge of everything is available only through rational awareness.

Dualistic Views of Mental Causation

The mental state can be characterized by two main properties, which are subjectivity and intentionality. In this regard, physical objects with their properties can be accessible to observation, and sometimes they are ignored, but at the same time, every object that has a physical form is available to every person. The mental state is the unification of the spirit, mind and ego of a person, which sends them to God for service. The extreme mental state is called the ordinary state of a person, when he perceives his bodily and rational activity and studies any activity of his soul.

In the doctrine of dualism, it is indicated that mental substance is not physical and immaterial. But is it possible? In philosophy, everything tends to believe that human consciousness is based on a mental substance that has no physical form. But at the same time, a person needs a scientific theory that will describe and explain everything that is a mental something, what kind of behavior it has and where it can be found.

Dualism in religion

Religious teaching draws a clear line between the existence of the spirit of principles, equal in strength. So god is opposed by an evil spirit, and each of them has equal rights. Dualism in religion can also be found in ancient writings and folk legends.

• chinese teachings about Yin and Yang;
• Ancient Persia is a cluster of religions of free choice;
• heretical trends;
• christianity, where the struggle between God and the devil is presented;
• islam, where peace is spoken of as a “divine house” and a “house of war”;
• judaism, where belief in demons reigns.

In religion, dualism is presented as a rivalry between two divine creatures. And at the same time, one of them must necessarily be evil and create chaos, and the other is kind and brings order to the world.

In Eastern mysticism, dualism is presented as the interaction between two polarities that are responsible for the created universe (light and darkness, good and evil). This is reflected in many symbols, and the most common of them are yin-yang. Their essence has always been the same: darkness (yin) and light (yang) constantly return and follow each other. By this they give rise to the created world or, as the Chinese call it, "Ten thousand things."

Dualism can also be found in metaphysics, where it is used as an example of the dual nature of particles such as wave-particle elements.

Dualism is a broad concept that is used to denote the presence and interaction of two fundamentally opposite principles in such areas of human life as:

• philosophy;

Already proceeding from the name, which speaks of the duality of something, we can conclude that one element in the concept of people (or according to physical laws) cannot exist without the second, and it does not matter whether they are at enmity with each other or are harmoniously combined. Good and evil are good examples in this case, which, although both are self-sufficient, cannot be separated.

The history of the term

The prerequisites for dualism can be found back in ancient times, when Plato, known to everyone, singled out two worlds: ideas (sensible things) and reality, but since science was only in its infancy, a clear idea of \u200b\u200bit was not formed. Already in modern times, the French scientist Rene Descartes distinguished between spirit and matter. In his opinion, spirit is capable of thinking, and matter is only able to stretch in time.

The concept of "dualism" was originally used in theology in relation to religious ideas about the struggle between a good God and a bad Satan - this term was introduced in 1700 by Thomas Hyde. A little more than thirty years later, in connection with the rapid development of philosophy by the German scientist F. Wolff, this term was used to denote two essentially opposite substances: spiritual and material. Much later, the concept began to be used in physical science, for example, when characterizing particles and antiparticles, and much more.

Duality principle

As already mentioned, the fundamental in this doctrine is pairing, or, in other words, duality, which is perfectly developed in the theory and practice of modern mathematics, but is no less well positioned in philosophy and other sciences. In addition to good and evil, in many spheres of human existence there are concepts of active and passive, ideal and material (in philosophy), feminine and masculine, order and chaos (in various religions), yin and yang (in the Chinese understanding of the universe). This list can be stretched indefinitely.

Dualism in religion, philosophy and physics

Since for the first time this term appeared precisely in relation to religion, and now many believers, even without realizing it themselves, use the law of dualism about two principles. If we take such an ancient religion as Zoroastrianism, we will see that one of its fundamental teachings is the struggle between good and evil. The Wise Lord and the Evil Spirit are the best demonstration of dualism. This is the ancient Chinese teaching about yin and yang, and the provisions of the ancient Greek Orphism, and Judaism with its belief in demons, and some Christian heresies (Gnosticism, Manichaeism, Bogomilism).

In philosophy, spirit and matter, mental and physical in a person are opposed, and at the same time an attempt is made to solve the problem of the interaction of physical and mental substances. Starting with Kant, dualism becomes not just a set of chaotic ideas and assumptions, but a philosophy of mind with its own structure.

In modern physics, this term is used to designate the opposite properties of an object, as a description of phenomena with radically different properties, and in the case of the presence of mutually exclusive conditions in the formulation of a physical law.

Dualism: "for" and "against"

There are many proponents and no less opponents of this rather interesting theory. In order for the readers to have a complete picture, we consider it necessary to cite some provisions in its defense, as well as those that refute it.

What confirms the correctness of dualism?

The first argument in defense of dualism is religious beliefs. Each of the major religions presupposes belief in life after death, an eternal soul that will outlive everything. The mind, according to most religions, can be replaced with an immortal soul. In fact, the two are almost interchangeable. This argument is, first of all, the basis for the belief of many people in the dualism of matter.

The second argument for dualism is irreducibility. It presupposes a variety of mental phenomena that cannot be subject to non-physical explanation. A striking example of this can be the quality and semantic content of human thoughts and beliefs. These things cannot be reduced to purely physical terms, therefore, they cannot be reduced.

The last argument is parapsychological phenomena. Psychic powers such as telepathy, foresight, telekinesis, clairvoyance are almost impossible to explain within the framework of physics and psychology. These phenomena reflect the non-physical and supernatural nature of the mind, which gives it dualism.

Refutation of the theory

The first major argument against dualism is simplicity. Materialists argue that their view of things is simpler (they believe in only one, the physical side of the issue). The materialistic point of view is also easier to prove, because there is no doubt that physical matter exists, while the idea of \u200b\u200bdualism about non-physical is just a hypothesis.

The second main argument that compromises dualism is the lack of explanation. Opponents of the theory can prove their views through scientific research, while dualists are unable to explain anything because no theory has ever been formulated.

The third argument is nervous dependence: mental abilities depend on the nervous activity of the brain. Materialists believe that the mind changes when the brain changes from drugs or trauma, for example.

The final argument against dualism is evolutionary history. Materialists assert: human individuals gradually evolved from simpler physical beings, that the principles of dualism do not allow.

Despite the presence of weighty arguments against dualism, one cannot fail to note that it has become widespread in many religious and philosophical movements, has been established in physics and is a constant subject of scientific discussion.

1.1 The mind-body problem

The mind-body problem is the next problem: what is the relationship between mind and body? Or, alternatively, what is the relationship between mental and physical properties?

People are endowed (or appear to be endowed with) both physical and mental properties. They have (or seem to have) such properties, the presence of which is discussed in the physical sciences. These physical properties include size, weight, shape, color, movement in time and space, etc. But they also have (or seem to have) mental properties that we do not attribute to ordinary physical objects. Among these properties are consciousness (including perceptual experience, emotional experiences and much more) and intentionality (including beliefs, desires, and much more); with respect to these properties, one can also say that they are inherent in the subject or self.

Physical properties are public, in the sense that they are, in principle, equally observable by everyone. Some physical properties - for example, the properties of an electron - are not directly observable at all, but they are equally accessible to everyone using scientific equipment and technology. There is no such thing with mental properties. I can tell you are in pain based on your behavior, but only you can directly feel the pain. Similarly, you know how something looks to you, and I can only guess about this. Conscious mental events are private to the subject, who has such privileged access to them that no one else has in relation to the physical.

The mind-body problem deals with the relationship between these two sets of properties. The mind-body problem breaks down into many components.

1. Ontological question: what are mental states and what are physical states? Is one class a subclass of another so that all mental states are physical, or vice versa? Or are mental states and physical states completely separated from each other?

2. The causal question: do physical states affect mental states? Do mental states affect physical states? And if so, how?

In connection with various aspects of the mental, such as consciousness, intentionality, selfhood, various aspects of the mind-body problem are revealed.

3. The problem of consciousness: what is consciousness? How does it relate to the brain and body?

4. The problem of intentionality: what is intentionality? How does it relate to the brain and body?

5. The problem of self: what is self? How does it relate to the brain and body?

Other aspects of the mind-body problem arise in connection with various aspects of the physical. For instance:

6. The problem of incarnation: what conditions must be met for the presence of consciousness in the body? Under what conditions is the body inherent in the individual subject?

The seeming insolubility of these problems gave rise to many philosophical views.

According to materialistic views, mental states, despite the appearance of the opposite, are just physical states. Behaviorism, functionalism, mind-brain identity theory, and computational theory of mind are examples of how materialists try to explain the possibility of such a state of affairs. The most notable unifying factor of such theories is an attempt to reveal the nature of the psyche and consciousness in terms of their ability to directly or indirectly modify behavior, but there are also such varieties of materialism that try to connect the mental and the physical, without resorting to a detailed explanation of the mental in terms of its role in behavior modification. ... These varieties are often grouped under the rubric of "nonreductive physicalism", although this designation itself is devoid of clear contours due to the lack of agreement on the meaning of the term "reduction".

According to idealistic views, physical states are actually mental. The fact is that the physical world is empirical the world, and as such it is an intersubjective product of our collective experience.

According to the dualistic views (which are discussed in this article), both mental and physical are real, and neither of them can be assimilated to the other. Below we look at the various forms of dualism and the problems associated with them.

In general, we can say that the mind-body problem exists because both consciousness and thinking (in their broad interpretation) seem to be very different from everything physical, and there is no unanimity on how to describe such beings who are endowed with both consciousness and with the body to satisfy us in terms of unity.

Among the many other articles that touch upon aspects of the mind-body problem, we can mention the following: behaviorism (eng.), Neutral monism (eng.), Etc.).

1.2 History of dualism

Dualism opposes "mental" to "bodily", but at different times the focus has been on various aspects of the mental. In the classical and medieval periods, it was believed that materialistic explanations were most obviously inapplicable to the intellect: since Descartes' times, it was assumed that the main obstacle to materialistic monism was "consciousness", the exemplary case of which was recognized as phenomenal consciousness or sensation.

The classic arrangement of accents goes back to Plato's Phaedo. Plato believed that the true substances are not ephemeral physical bodies, but eternal Ideas, the imperfect copies of which are bodies. These Ideas provide not only the possibility of the world, but also its intellectual comprehensibility, playing the role of universals, or what Frege called "concepts." It is this connection with intellectual comprehensibility that matters for the philosophy of consciousness. Since Ideas constitute the foundation of comprehensibility, it is they that the intellect must grasp in the process of cognition. In Phaedo, Plato puts forward a variety of arguments in favor of the immortality of the soul, but the argument is important for us in which it is argued that the intellect is immaterial due to the immateriality of Ideas and that the intellect should be related to the Ideas it comprehends (78b4–84b8). This relationship is so great that the soul strives to leave the body in which it is enclosed, and dwell in the world of Ideas. The achievement of this goal may be preceded by many reincarnations. Plato's dualism, therefore, is not just a concept of the philosophy of consciousness, but also an integral part of his entire metaphysics.

One of the problems of Plato's dualism was related to the fact that, although he speaks of the confinement of the soul in the body, he does not provide a clear explanation of the connection between a specific soul and a specific body. The difference in their nature makes this connection something mysterious.

Aristotle did not believe in Platonic ideas that exist regardless of the cases of their implementation. Aristotelian ideas or forms (the capital letter disappears with their self-sufficiency) are the natures and properties of things, and they exist in these things. This allowed Aristotle to explain the unity of body and soul by the thesis that the soul is the form of the body. This means that the soul of a particular person is just his human nature. It seems that this makes the soul a property of the body, and this circumstance contributed to the materialist interpretation of his theory by many of its interpreters, both ancient and modern. The interpretation of Aristotle's philosophy of mind - as well as his entire doctrine of forms - is no less controversial today than it was immediately after his death. Nevertheless, the texts leave no doubt about Aristotle's conviction that the intellect, although it is part of the soul, differs from its other abilities in the absence of a bodily organ. His argumentation in favor of this position looks more weighty than that of Plato, an argument in favor of the immateriality of thinking and, accordingly, some kind of dualism. He argued that intelligence must be immaterial because if it were material, it could not take all forms. Like the eye, the physical nature of which is such that, in contrast to the ear, it is sensitive to light, but not to sound, the intellect, being in a physical organ, could only be sensitive to a limited range of physical things; but this is not so - we can think of any material object ( De anima III, 4; 429a10-b9). Since it has no material organ, its activity must be essentially immaterial.

Modern followers of Aristotle, who in other cases highly appreciate its importance for modern philosophy, usually say that this argument is interesting only from a historical point of view and insignificant for the Aristotelian system as a whole. They emphasize that Aristotle was not a "Cartesian" dualist, because intelligence is one aspect of the soul, and the soul is a form of the body, not a separate substance. Kenny argues that Aristotle in his theory of spirit as form interprets it in the same way as Ryle did, since in this theory the soul is equated with the dispositions inherent in a living body. This "anti-Cartesian" approach to Aristotle seems to ignore the fact that, according to Aristotle, the form there is substance.

It may seem that these problems are of purely historical interest. Below, in section 4.5, we will see, however, that this is not the case.

This feature of the Aristotelian system, that is, the identification of form and substance, is productively used in this context by Aquinas, who identifies soul, intellect and form and considers them as substance. (See, for example, Part I, questions 75 and 76). But although the form (and hence the intellect identical to it) constitute the substance of the human person, they are not that person itself. Aquinas says that when we turn to the saints for prayer - with the exception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, who is believed to have preserved her body in Heaven and therefore was always a whole person - we should say, for example, not “Saint Peter, pray for us ", And" soul of Saint Peter, pray for us. " The soul, although an immaterial substance, is a person only in unity with its body. Without a body, those aspects of her personal memory that depend on images (considered bodily) disappear. (See, Part I, question 89).

More modern versions of dualism go back to Descartes' Reflections and the controversy over his theory. Descartes was substantial dualist... He believed that there are two types of substance: matter, the essential property of which is spatial extension, and spirit, the essential property of which is thinking. Descartes' conception of the relationship between spirit and body was very different from that which existed in the Aristotelian tradition. Aristotle considered an exact science of matter impossible. The behavior of matter essentially depends on its form. You cannot combine any matter with any form - you cannot make a knife out of butter or a man out of paper, so the nature of matter is a necessary condition for the nature of substance. But the nature of a substance cannot be deduced only from the nature of matter: it is impossible to explain substances "from the bottom up". Matter is determinate, made determinate by means of form. This is how, Aristotle believed, the connection between the soul and the body can be explained: a specific soul exists in a specific part of matter as an organizing principle.

This belief in the relative uncertainty of matter is one of the foundations of Aristotelian denial of atomism. If matter is atomic, then it itself turns out to be a collection of certain objects, and it will be natural to consider the properties of macroscopic substances as simple unions of the natures of atoms.

Although, unlike most of his famous contemporaries and closest followers, Descartes was not an atomist, he, like others, took a mechanistic position on the properties of matter. Bodies are machines that operate according to their own laws. Except for the intervention of spirits, matter itself follows a deterministic course. Where the influence on the bodies of spirits is required, they must "pull the levers" in one of the parts of this machinery, with their own laws. This raises the question of where exactly these "levers" are in the body. Descartes chose the pineal gland mainly because it is not duplicated on both sides of the brain and therefore could be a candidate for a unique unifying function.

The main ambiguity that Descartes and his contemporaries faced was, however, not where there is an interaction, but in that as in general, two things as different as thinking and extension could interact. This seems especially mysterious if we assume that the causal interaction occurs through push- as anyone who has experienced the influence of atomism would think, the model of causality in which is something like a picture of billiard balls flying off from each other.

Descartes' disciples such as Arnold Geilinks and Nicholas Malebranche concluded that all interactions between spirit and body require the direct intervention of God. Corresponding states of mind are just opportunity for such interventions, and not their real reasons. It would be convenient to think that the occasionalists considered all causation natural. with the exception of that which takes place between the spirit and the body. In reality, they generalized their conclusion and believed that all causality is directly dependent on God. Here we have no opportunity to discuss why they held this opinion.

Cartesian concept of dualism substances was criticized by more radical empiricists, who considered it a difficult task to give meaning to the concept of substance in general. Locke, the moderate empiricist, recognized the existence of both tangible and intangible substances. Berkeley became famous for denying material substance - he generally denied existence outside the spirit. In his early Notebooks, he pondered the denial of immaterial substance due to our lack of the idea of \u200b\u200bthe latter and the reduction of our self to a collection of "ideas" that fill it with content. As a result, he decided that the self, presented as something standing above the ideas it perceives, is an essential component of an adequate understanding of the human personality. Although the self and its actions are not given in consciousness as his objects, we indirectly know about them simply by virtue of the fact that we are active subjects. Hume rejected such claims and proclaimed the self as a mere cohesion of its ephemeral contents.

In fact, Hume criticized the concept of substance as a whole for lack of empirical content: when you look for the owner of the properties that make up the substance, you find only the next properties. Consequently, the spirit, he argued, is only a "bundle" or "heap" of impressions and ideas, that is, concrete mental states or events, without any owner. This position became known as “ ligamentous dualism", And it is a special case theory of substance as a bundle, according to which objects as a whole are only ordered sets of properties. The problem for the Yumist is to explain what exactly ties together the elements of the bond. This difficulty arises for any substance, but in the case of material bodies, it seems that it can be resolved without any special equivalents: the unity of the physical link is created by some causal interaction between the elements of this link. But when it comes to spirit, the causal connection alone is not enough; an additional relation of shared consciousness is needed. In Section 5.2.1, we will see the problematic view of such an attitude as more elementary than the concept of belonging to a subject.

With regard to Hume's theory, the following should be noted. His connective theory is a theory that focuses on the nature of the unity of consciousness. As a theory of such a unity, it does not have to be dualistic at all. The physicalists Parfit and Shoemaker, for example, support her. In general, physicalists will accept it unless they want to attribute unity to the brain and the body as a whole. The ligament theory can be dualistic, provided that dualism is recognized properties, which we will discuss in more detail in the next section.

The crisis in the history of dualism was associated, however, with the growing popularity mechanism in science of the nineteenth century. According to the mechanicist, the world, as they would now say, is "physically closed." This means that everything that happens is a consequence of the laws of physics and occurs in accordance with them. There is therefore no possibility for the spirit to intervene in the physical world as seems to be required by interactionism. The Mechanist believes that the conscious spirit is epiphenomenon (a term whose widespread use is associated with the name of Huxley), that is, a by-product of a physical system that does not have an opposite effect on it. Likewise, the recognition of the facts of consciousness does not violate the integrity of physical science. Many philosophers, however, have found it implausible to state, for example, the following: the pain I have when you hit me, the visual sensation I have when I see a ferocious lion rush at me, or the sense of conscious awareness I have me, when I listen to your argument - all this has no direct relation to my reactions to all this. The interest of twentieth-century philosophy in finding a plausible form of materialistic monism is very much due to the need to avoid this counterintuitiveness. But while dualism has fallen out of fashion in psychology since the advent of behaviorism, and in philosophy since Rile, the debate is far from over. A number of prominent neurologists, such as Sherrington and Eccles, have continued to defend dualism as the only theory that can leave the data of consciousness intact. Dissatisfaction with physicalism among leading philosophers has led in the last decade of the 20th century to a moderate resurgence of property dualism. Below, at least some of the reasons for this should be clarified.

Original: Robinson, Howard, "Dualism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL \u003d .

Found a mistake on the page?
Select it and press Ctrl + Enter

Philosophy seeped into the consciousness of the broad masses at the end of the last century. Then the first reports about the multiplicity of worlds, the reality of the existence of the microcosm and its ramification began to be mentioned. Strange as it may seem, quantum physics gave rise to duality in cognition of the issue. Throughout their existence, philosophers have tried to get rid of duality. In philosophy, monism ruled, denying the presence of two opposite substances. Therefore, Descartes' supporters and himself were criticized for adhering to the duality of the world. Attempts were constantly made to combine monism with dialectics, which led to many paradoxes in philosophy.

Recently, modern philosophers have made attempts to combine dialectics and duality. For the first time in the 90s of the 20th century, the concept appeared dialectical dualism... What is dualism and what is it?

What is dualism

Dualism is philosophical current, according to which two classes of things mutually influence each other without changing their structure. That is, the material and spiritual principles equally coexist in this flow. The term dualism comes from the Latin "duality". It is the duality of this trend in philosophy that led to this name. If we take, for example, monism, then in philosophy it will be the clear opposite.

The first philosopher to use the term dualism was H. Wolf. He believed that all those who acknowledge the existence of the material and non-material world are dualists. In list leading representatives this trend is considered by the French philosopher Descartes and the German Kant. The first of them singled out spiritual and bodily substances, which found their confirmation in the person himself: the soul and body. The second divided the two essences of dualism into human consciousness and the objective basis of phenomena. The basis of the phenomena, in his opinion, is unknown.

This philosophical trend appeared long before the founders themselves. It existed in antiquity. In the Middle Ages, before the definition of the concept itself, it was considered to be about the eternal struggle of two principles: Good and Evil. In Marxist-Leninist philosophy, it is customary to completely reject the very idea of \u200b\u200bthe existence of dualism, since, in her opinion, the material is the basis for the emergence and existence of the spiritual (mental) and in no other way.

Thus, this philosophical meaning is directly related to the eternal law of philosophy about the unity and struggle of opposites. Philosophical law directly says that there is no unity without opposition, and opposition cannot exist without unity. Any of the selected objects has its direct opposite. Such existence leads to an inevitable contradiction, as a result of which one of the known objects disappears completely and another appears in a new state. And so on ad infinitum.

Types of dualism

Historically, dualism has two varieties - this is Cartesianism and Occasionalism.

Considering the philosophical trend in the context of historical materialism and dialectical materialism, one must take into account another no less important question of philosophy: "What is primary: matter or consciousness?"

Dualism in theology (religious) implies the presence of two opposite forces (gods). In theology, this trend is designated as ditheism (bitheism). The opposite of doctrine presents ditheism (bitheism) as a moral dualism, which at the same time does not imply any "theisms". That is, ditheism (bitheism) suggests that religion can be both dual and monotheistic, but there must necessarily be a supreme god. An example of this type is the ancient Christian heresy - Marcionism. Marcionism claimed:

It is aimed at recognizing the equality of the material and the ideal, but denies their relativity to each other. In Western philosophy, following the example of Descartes, mind and self-consciousness were equated on the basis of the human soul and body. In Eastern philosophy, matter and consciousness were connected, so that matter began to include body and consciousness.

Dualism and philosophy of mind

• In the philosophy of consciousness, this is a mutual complement of consciousness and matter. Consciousness and matter are here equal in importance. This type of philosophical teaching is usually called cartesianism... The material and the spiritual are different in their properties: the material has a form, position in space, has a body mass; the spiritual is subjective and purposeful.
• The second form, besides Cartesianism, is dualism of qualities or properties. There is no spiritual substance, but there is something material (the brain) with properties that give rise to psychic phenomena.
• Epiphenomenalism considers motives and desires as side processes occurring in the brain of casual events. The role of the influence of mental entities on physical processes is denied.
• Predicativity is another form of dualism. Indicates a description of the subject of judgment. For the perception of the world according to this doctrine of philosophy, many descriptions - predicates are required.
• Symbolic physicalism (prophetic dualism) presents consciousness as a group of properties that are independent of each other. Consciousness is not a separate substance, since the brain secretes these independent properties. When matter is like a human body, then properties appear.

In physics, dualism acts as the basis for oscillatory processes. If we consider it in quantum mechanics, then the dualism here will be the duality of corpuscles and waves, or rather, the dual nature of these particles. As a compromise, this duality in quantum mechanics came to be described by the wave function of the particle.

The main postulates of the dualistic law in life

The structure of everything in the Universe depends on the Law of dualism, which affirms the existence of a plurality of worlds. The development of all that exists is due to the transition of matter from one state to another. Even in our world, we can always meet with duality, at least in a magnet. Plus and minus are two opposite constituents of a substance and at the same time make a substance a single whole.

The postulates of the law on the duality of the world highlight some points without which existence is impossible:

1. Any phenomenon has its own positive and negative direction.
2. Each of the opposites has a particle of antipode in it. The Chinese give a good explanation for the Yin and Yang energies. Each of them has something of the other.
3. Remembering the unity and struggle of opposites, we can say that only in the struggle will harmony and unity be created.
4. Only constant conflict can be a driving force in development. Thanks to the conflict, the development of the Universe does not stop for a minute.

Using the dualistic law in practice, each of us can change our worldview in relation to the ongoing processes. Even in a negative situation, you can find a part of the positive. A philosophical attitude to everything that happens will make it easier to endure the blows of fate and life will become much easier.