Descartes offers a coherent solution to the mind/soul and body problem. Discuss (40 marks)
This essay will focus on whether Descartes offers a logical solution to the mind/soul and
body problem. It will argue that whilst Descartes attempts to offer a coherent solution to the
argument, ultimately, he is unsuccessful and other thinkers such as Aristotle have a more
refined line of argument.
Descartes’s solution to the mind/soul and body problem was partly coherent and logical in a
way. Descartes expanded on Plato’s thinking when attempting to solve the mind/soul and
body problem, which we see very clearly in his explanations. Descartes was a very strong
believer in the soul and body being separable, this thinking transferred to his solution about
the mind. Descartes believed in substance dualism, meaning that he believed that the mind
and the brain were two separate substances. This idea came from Leibniz’s law in which he
argued that we can be sure our mind exists, but we cannot be sure our bodies exist
(Descartes later came up with the saying ‘’cogito ergo sum’’ meaning ‘’I think therefore I
am’’) meaning that the mind and body must be separate units. Descartes quickly linked the
mind to the soul and argued that the mind can live without the body, and that they could
make events occur within each other (e.g. the mind can make events occur in the body). This
line of argument is logical as it explains how the mind and the body work together.
The very logical problem with this theory of Descartes’ is the fact that Descartes never
explained how the mind and body interact. He claimed that they would have conversations
with each other but never explained how these conversations occurred within the body.
Gilbert Ryle argued that Descartes had made a ‘’category mistake’’. Ryle called Descartes’
theory ‘’the ghost in the machine’’ (the ghost being the mind and the machine being the
body). Ryle and Aristotle both opposed Descartes’ thinking of substance dualism and
believed it was absurd. Ryle in particular, expanded on this by saying that the mind and the
brain belong to different logical categories but were mistakenly associated together by
Descartes. He believed that the mind is not internal, but it is what we do with our body.
Aristotle would’ve argued against Descartes’ views as he believed that the mind and body
could not be separated. He believed that they were like a wax and seal. You cannot separate
the wax from the seal and in that same way, you cannot separate the body from the
mind/soul. Aristotle would’ve argued that Descartes’ view is completely illogical. Ryle’s
counter argument to Descartes offers a different approach and a far more coherent solution
to the mind/soul and body problems and it avoids the question of how the mind and body
communicate with each other.
However, Ward would argue against Ryle. He used the example of two people; one is
pretending to be angry whilst the other is truly angry. Although both of these people are
exhibiting external behaviours of anger, only one of those people are experiencing it
internally too. This makes Ryle’s argument against Descartes illogical as it is also counter-
intuitive to humans as some internal states are not always exhibited externally. Plato would
also argue against Ryle as his view aligned with Descartes’ view on the soul. Plato would’ve
argued against Aristotle and suggested that the soul and body can live without each other,
just as Descartes also argued. Both Plato and Descartes would’ve agreed that their solution
to the mind/soul and body problem was the most coherent out of all as it also aligned with
Plato’s theory of the world of Forms. Plato had a strong belief that the soul had access to the
This essay will focus on whether Descartes offers a logical solution to the mind/soul and
body problem. It will argue that whilst Descartes attempts to offer a coherent solution to the
argument, ultimately, he is unsuccessful and other thinkers such as Aristotle have a more
refined line of argument.
Descartes’s solution to the mind/soul and body problem was partly coherent and logical in a
way. Descartes expanded on Plato’s thinking when attempting to solve the mind/soul and
body problem, which we see very clearly in his explanations. Descartes was a very strong
believer in the soul and body being separable, this thinking transferred to his solution about
the mind. Descartes believed in substance dualism, meaning that he believed that the mind
and the brain were two separate substances. This idea came from Leibniz’s law in which he
argued that we can be sure our mind exists, but we cannot be sure our bodies exist
(Descartes later came up with the saying ‘’cogito ergo sum’’ meaning ‘’I think therefore I
am’’) meaning that the mind and body must be separate units. Descartes quickly linked the
mind to the soul and argued that the mind can live without the body, and that they could
make events occur within each other (e.g. the mind can make events occur in the body). This
line of argument is logical as it explains how the mind and the body work together.
The very logical problem with this theory of Descartes’ is the fact that Descartes never
explained how the mind and body interact. He claimed that they would have conversations
with each other but never explained how these conversations occurred within the body.
Gilbert Ryle argued that Descartes had made a ‘’category mistake’’. Ryle called Descartes’
theory ‘’the ghost in the machine’’ (the ghost being the mind and the machine being the
body). Ryle and Aristotle both opposed Descartes’ thinking of substance dualism and
believed it was absurd. Ryle in particular, expanded on this by saying that the mind and the
brain belong to different logical categories but were mistakenly associated together by
Descartes. He believed that the mind is not internal, but it is what we do with our body.
Aristotle would’ve argued against Descartes’ views as he believed that the mind and body
could not be separated. He believed that they were like a wax and seal. You cannot separate
the wax from the seal and in that same way, you cannot separate the body from the
mind/soul. Aristotle would’ve argued that Descartes’ view is completely illogical. Ryle’s
counter argument to Descartes offers a different approach and a far more coherent solution
to the mind/soul and body problems and it avoids the question of how the mind and body
communicate with each other.
However, Ward would argue against Ryle. He used the example of two people; one is
pretending to be angry whilst the other is truly angry. Although both of these people are
exhibiting external behaviours of anger, only one of those people are experiencing it
internally too. This makes Ryle’s argument against Descartes illogical as it is also counter-
intuitive to humans as some internal states are not always exhibited externally. Plato would
also argue against Ryle as his view aligned with Descartes’ view on the soul. Plato would’ve
argued against Aristotle and suggested that the soul and body can live without each other,
just as Descartes also argued. Both Plato and Descartes would’ve agreed that their solution
to the mind/soul and body problem was the most coherent out of all as it also aligned with
Plato’s theory of the world of Forms. Plato had a strong belief that the soul had access to the
