What is good / bad about this answer? “Assess the claim that the mind and body are distinct” Substance dualism is the belief that the mind and body are separate, it was an idea first put forward by Descarts in his “Meditations”. Descarts believed that the mind and body must be different things because they had different properties (Leibniz’s Law). One thing he identified as different between the mind and body is divisibility. He argued that the body is divisible and the mind is not, therefore they cannot be the same thing. A problem with this idea is that we seem to be able to divide the mind. Modern neuroscience has shown that if we damage or remove part of the brain then it seems to effect the mind as well.

Essay Feedback What went well: Planning Content Use of technical terms Generally focused Readable Even better if: Clarity Depth of Explanation Link to the question Evaluation Conclusion

Pick and sentence and rewrite it clearly on your whiteboards. Clarity Problem: Sometimes your explanation of particular ideas or arguments is not as clear as it could be even if they are correct. “Substance is a fundamental thing and cannot be separated.” “This uses Leibniz’s law to say that physical substances can be divided and mental substances can’t be so they are not the same thing.” “The knowledge argument shows that some knowledge is not physical and therefore there must be separate properties of the body” Pick and sentence and rewrite it clearly on your whiteboards.

How could these two statements be explained better? Depth of Explanation Problem: Introducing correct ideas but not going into the depth needed to fully explain them. Near enough everyone was guilty of this at some point in their writing. “Also, modern neuroscience proves that you can literally divide the mental. Descartes responds to this by saying that they are divisible in different ways; the mental is functionally divisible whilst the body is spatially divisible.” “One major criticism of this argument is that a mind without a physical body is not actually conceivable. If this is true then the argument fails and Descartes cannot claim the two things to be separate.” How could these two statements be explained better?

How could you link these arguments to the question? Link to the Question Problem: It should be explicitly clear how each point of your essay links into the question. “Mini-conclusions” can help. “This argues for property dualism over physicalism, as according to physicalism the only things that exist are physical – so if someone learns something that is not physical (as they knew all the physical information already) it renders physicalism incorrect.” “If interactionism is true then there is the question of how a non-physical thing can interact with a physical thing (as Descartes believes they can). The mental should not be able to interact with the physical.” How could you link these arguments to the question?

What is good about these statements? Evaluation Problem: Essays in A2 are heavily weighted towards AO2 writing (evaluation) that means you need to consider responses and strengths / weaknesses of arguments. “However, modern neuroscience seems to have proven Descartes wrong as we now seem to be able to split the mind as we change the physical brain. Some examples of this include people losing memories or changing personalities after brain operations. This seems to undermine Descartes original argument and shows that the mind and body might share the property of divisibility after all.” “Interactionism presents a serious problem for dualism as if supporters cannot explain the link between them, its hard to see how they can claim them to be truly distinct.” What is good about these statements?

Conclusion Problem: You need a conclusion in your essay. It should summarise what you’ve written and express your overall answer to the question based on what you’ve included in your writing. Use the question terminology! “Given the arguments and responses discussed in this essay it is hard to see how the dualist can claim the body and mind to be truly distinct. Despite Descartes divisibility argument and the knowledge argument seemingly fitting with our intuitions they both have sufficient criticisms to undermine their strengths – particularly the fact the mental is divisible and the idea that we can learn different kinds of “knowledge”. Overall however, the problem of interaction causes the biggest difficulty for the dualist view. To truly claim the mind and body are distinct they must overcome this hurdle.” Introductions should be the opposite of this: What is the question asking? What are you going to show? How are you going to show it? What ideas did they cover in the essay?

What content did people make mistakes on? Concerning Content What content did people make mistakes on?

Key Minor Points Distinct: Recognizably different in nature from something else of a similar type (dictionary). So in this question we are essentially asking are the mind and body ultimately different things? Too many people misinterpreted this or seemed to not understand what the question was asking. You could use Property dualism in different ways in this essay. On one hand you could argue that the mind and body are not truly distinct as they are both properties of the physical. On the other hand you could argue that they are distinct as they are distinct types of property. The idea that the mind and body are connected and changing one causes changes in the other is a strong argument for them being connected in some way, it does not necessarily mean they are not distinct, nor is it a criticism of the divisibility argument (as many people seemed to use it as).

Philosophical Zombies Physicalism claims that consciousness is ultimately physical in nature. It follows that any world which is physically identical to this one must contain consciousness. But we can conceive of a world which is physically identical to this one, but in which there is no conscious experience – the world of the physical zombies. Therefore physicalism is false. There must be something other than the physical. Basic outline of the physicalist position. Nothing to add here. IF physicalism is true and consciousness is ultimately physical in nature then a world which is an exact physical duplicate of our world should also contain consciousness. IF I can imagine a world that is an exact physical duplicate of this one but does not contain qualia or consciousness then it suggests that there must be something else involved in mental states. If they were only physical then they would be accounted for in the P-Zombie world. The obvious answer is some form of dualism.

Interactionism and Epiphenomenalism People seem to have misinterpreted where these two ideas fall in the dualism spectrum. They are not entirely separate theories about what the mind and body are, you’ll notice when discussing them we did not talk about substances or properties in the same way as we did for the two theories of dualism we covered. They are ideas and theories about how the mind and body are connected. They are ideas about how the non-physical mind (assuming dualism is correct) effects and is effected by the body. They are usually associated with particular dualist theories (interactionism – substance, epiphenomenalism – property) but they do not have to be. In general then, if an essay asks you to consider the connection between the mind and body – these two theories are important.

Interactionism and Epiphenomenalism How is this useful for this essay? When it comes to this particular essay, you need to frame these theories as ideas about how the mind and body are connected, not as entirely separate arguments about the types of thing the mind and body are. They are relevant to this question – but more so as an attempt to show how the mind and body can remain two separate things and still cause events in each other, they are not “other theories of dualism”. Essentially interactionist arguments and epiphenomenalism should be used to defend against the criticism of interaction (conceptual or empirical) if you have considered this in your essay. Otherwise it’s difficult to ensure they are relevant to this particular question.

What could you have covered? Assess the claim that the mind and body are distinct (25 marks)

Homework – For Next Lesson Outline the divisibility argument and explain one criticism. Outline the P-Zombie argument and explain one criticism. Outline the problem of interaction and explain how Descartes attempts to respond to this.

Essay Feedback What went well: Planning Content Use of technical terms Generally focused Readable Even better if: Clarity Depth of Explanation Link to the question Evaluation Conclusion D.I.R.T: Add a few paragraphs to the last page of your essay that either explains a particular point better, links information to the question or concludes your writing. Set yourself 3 targets for the next essay you complete. What do you need to work on? What could be better?