人的本質(zhì)：二元論與物理主義

• do i survive after death? we need to know what i built
• what's the fundamental metaphysics of me
• what is that something exists for future for me
• whats the nature of entity of me
• what's the nature of personal identity
• "do i have after life" is a misconceive

（這篇筆記：只到p3—靈魂的存在的討論）

--

Definition to death: the death of life

• life after death/survive after death
• objection said: there is no life after death like there is no food left on the after dinner plate

survive after death:

• survive: something happened but they survive
• indicates that they have life
• discuss: whether you have life after death

IInstance

there is no such thing says you are yet died after your death or you are still yet survive after you died

precise open question: might I still exist after my bodily death?

depend on what I am

the answer is varied

what a body died

• converge to the death of body, though taken by several ways
• suppose is bodily death

legitimate question:

"will I survive the death of my body"

"will i still be around after death "

• to answer that question is to get clear what is something about me

metaphysical question:

• what kind of thing is a person
• What am i ?
• what kind of entity am I?

whether or not a person can survive or continue to life after his death of body should depend on - how he's built and how he's made and what he's part on

basic Prominent position on this question: (not only position on the metaphysics question )

1. a person is a combination of a body and something else - the mind, which is separate from and distinct from the body, also known as soul.

• So we can say a human is made of body and soul.
• soul is not compose of material object - not body
• soul - house of or the seat of the consciousness or thinking
• interpreting the mind based upon non material term, non physical term

• therefore the first view is The Dualist view

The dualist view: there are two basic components

using this component according which souls are immateral and body is materal substance

Monist view : one basic component

Explanation: a person is just a body, is just a material object according to which there is no souls

aka physicalism

a person is just a body that can ____(sing, discover something about universe, poetry) (do all the thing)

"could be there are souls but there are no body "

• this is called idealism - all the exists of mind and ideas

other point

Dualist (further talking)

• the mind is based in something immaterial
• can give direct and orders to the body, on the one hand
• the other hand is the body sort of generates in put that eventually gets sensed or felt by the soul
• it's a two way interaction

the question: presume souls are immateral, the death of body could not take away the existance of the soul

• death might be severing of that connection (two way interaction of body and soul)

gives people the belief that people still have possibility life after death

• although we said people are combination of bodily parts and soul parts,
• we need actually strictly hold out that people do not have the existence after death
• i think we need also to say the person just is the soul
• soul and body is a pair, destruct the pair, then person no longer exist
• ?

  2.人的本質(zhì)：二元論與物理主義 P2 - 27:42

  ?
• the body is not essential part of me,
• what i am strictly speaking is a soul. as I exist, so soul exist
• close connection of body and soul
• the destruction of body without destroying me
• ?

  2.人的本質(zhì)：二元論與物理主義 P2 - 27:41

  ?

position to dualist:

"the person, is strictly speaking, the soul"

"the soul have very intimate connection with the body"

" but person not the body, the person is the soul"

"so even if that intimate connection gets destroyed, the person, the soul still exists "

"soul and body could be distinct?"

"does the soul, survive the destruction of body"

• doesn't gurantee that the soul could survive after the body.
• according to which two way interactions, soul could be dying simultaneously when body get destroyed
• so we could come up with the process of S1 to Sn

cconclusion above

Plato intrests:

• are there any souls,
• if there are do we have a food reason to believe they have survive after the death of body
• if it survives, how long does it survive.
• does the soul continue to exist after the death of body or forever,
• are we immortal? does soul exists forever

"if souls are immaterial, but the very word of immateral is defined as something that is cannot destructed by material or body decomposition"

• souls is immaterial, does it follow automatically, trivially, that the soul can't be destroyed by a material process B1 to Bn
• doesn't it follow a soul an immaterial property can destroyed by material property.
• ?

  2.人的本質(zhì)：二元論與物理主義 P2 - 33:25

  ?
• doesn't follow automatically, trivially
• it may follow refer to plato, once we understand the metaphysics nature of soul, we'll see why it can't be destroyed
• however we're dealing with interactionist dualism
• body are able to affect the soul
• physical process can cause some sort of changes of mental process occuring in my soul
• once we admit the dualism picture: the material body can influence what happened in immaterial soul, we once leads out the possibility that the body process of which B1 to Bn could set up S1 to Sn, eventually result in the destruction of soul

question:

location of soul

• we could not say that soul have locations since they immateral
• come up with several ideas presuming soul location as well as the possibilities of physical function that lead towards disillusion
• we get lulled into thinking that we are where our bodies are but that metaphyscial illusion

come back to question:

do we have any good reason to believe in soul at all

about the view of the nature of the person

a person has a soul, something immaterial and not a body

it's a famiilar view

• is it right to believe it's correct?
• so lead up to the question: a person is just a body?
• which is a materialism view of what biologist can investigate

• when we say a person is just a body, physicalism doesn't mean that a person is just an old body,
• It's not as though there is any importance between physical objects
• some physical objects can do far more interesting than other physical objects

"each one of us is just a body that can do amazing things, we are bodies that can think, we are bodies that can plan, we are bodies that can feel, we are bodies that can be afraid and be creative and have dream and aspiration, we are bodies that can communicate with each other. We are bodies that are a people. "

"but a physician says we just made of body"

靈魂存在與否的論證

what is a person?

1. Dualist view:

• made of body and the soul
• only part of essential is soul, though it's got rather intimate interaction with a particular body

2.Physicalist view:

• a person is just a body, but not an old body,
• a person is a body that can do a certain array of abilities
• bodies that can think, plan, alliterate, creative and so for and so on,
• the thing we can do other than other physical object

P functioning body

• P functioning body. (P for person) - a body can think, creative, to be a human
• if dead, we do not no longer have P functioning body

Physicalist view of mind

• there exists mind, functioned as the ability of body.
• ?

  3.靈魂存在與否的論證（一） P3 - 03:58

  ?
• talk of smile is just a way of talking about the ability of body to form a smile.
• Talk of mind is just talking about the ability to do various
• the mind is just talking about the body can think, can communicate can plan, can deliberate, can be creative...
• there's no extra thing, the mind, above and beyond the body.

"The mind is not the brain"

• "The talk of mind is talk about eh P functioning of body "
• If dead, the mind get destroyed

Dualist view,

• death is the seperation of mind and the body.

Physicalist view

• The end of this set of functioning.

Basic idea of death

Death is basically the terminality of the function of the body.

"zhaichao:Metaphysics view, according to which souls are immaterial "

Whether we believe in either view, should we believe in the existence of the soul?

1. How do we prove the existence of things?

• Usual method: we posit the existence of something that we can't see to explain something else that we all agree to take place.

• Inferred the existence of atoms based on the fact that doing that allows me to explain things that needs explaining
• posit an unseen object allows you to explain certain things.
• The procedure called : Inference to the best explanation

Best explanation:

• a posit that can be the Justification of best explanation

Q: are there things that the existence of a soul could explain?

and explain better than the explanation that we would have if we have limited ourselves to the bodies

suppose there was Feature F:

• are there things about us that physicalism can't explain?
• However we can use dualism to tell it all?
• soul exists when we admit the feature F
• the example of falling in love is based on the soul

What's the relevant feature F

do we need to appeal an extra-physical to appeal it?

tentative arguement - find right F and make out the right explanation using dualism to prove the fact that the soul exists

not single argument -- however connect kinds of arguments to explain feature F

objection to dualist view

Must there be something outside the body that controls the body?

you need souls to explain free will

"isn't that prejudice"

"That we will follow once we assume that object have not believes and desire, what's the meaning of withholding the ascribing of desires and beliefs "

"what we could really said it no machine could feel anything emotionally"

"desire is just the pure aspect of emotion"

distinguish: beliefs and desires, give sense in the way of life, and computers can do that, however there's emotional and mental side we could worried could a robot feel love or afraid

"so do we need to appeal to souls to explain something about us?"

"mental, the behavioural aspect, is not compelling arguement"

we could not just utilise beliefs and desires which the robot doesn't have to explain the human identity as well as the existence of the soul, since there's prejudice exists, that usually accompanies worry, that leads to messy verdiction.

"can robot feel emotion?"

"could a purely physical being fall in love?"

"could it be afraid of things"

"could it hope of something"

people can feel emotion, however apparently no robot can feel emotion.

so it's more to us than mere physical thing

summarise

Notes taken in a philosophy class is different to other subjects, we can only take the questions and arguments and categories them. However, it takes up the specification on the understanding upon detailing the inferential aspect.

•