Descartes’, Spinoza’s, and Leibniz’s Response to the...

Since Descartes many philosophers have discussed the problem of interaction between the mind and body. Philosophers have given rise to a variety of different answers to this question all with their own merits and flaws. These answers vary quite a lot. There is the idea of total separation between mind and body, championed by Descartes, which has come to be known as â€Å"Cartesian Dualism†. This, of course, gave rise to one of the many major responses to the mind-body problem which is the exact opposite of dualism; monism. Monism is the idea that mind and body one and the same thing and therefore have no need for interaction. Another major response to the problem is that given by Leibniz, more commonly known as pre-ordained harmony or†¦show more content†¦They exist as substances and according to Descartes they are the only two substances that exist in the universe. His argument for dualism is, â€Å"†¦on the one hand I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, insofar as I am merely a thinking thing and not an extended thing, and because on the other hand I have a distinct idea of a body, insofar as it is merely an extended thing and not a thinking thing†¦(50)†. Descartes says that we exist insofar as we are unextended thinking things and thus can exist without a physical body (50). Furthermore, Descartes reasons that there are certain things that the mind can do that the body cannot do and vice versa (50-51). For instance, Descartes says that the ability to imagine and understand things must exist solely in the mind because there is no available option for the body to understand on its own (51). Much in the same way he reasons that the mind cannot move or change shape and thus must exist in some other substance (51). It is here that we see Descartes’ distinction between mind and body and how they do not exist in the same realm as one another. Descartes also makes the distinction between mind and body by saying the body is divisible at all times and the mind can never be divided (53). That is to say that he thinks that the body can be split up into smaller sections each of which are then considered in their own right, but the mind, however, is always one substance and cannot be divided up into smaller