>The mind and the body are entirely different substances>Mind is different from matter. It is indivisible, not tangible.>Matter is divisible and tangible>How do these two come in contact if they are entirely different substances?>muh uhh..lets insert God between them. Problem solved.It astonishes me how retarded this motherfucker actually was. Not to mention, his conception of space was a total shit-tier bullshit too.
>>24890547Descartes has many problems, but this type of dualism is fairly common and not really his fault. If you ask any random person on the street, they will tell you that information and mud are two completely different categories. How come information can be embedded in mud? Well... uhhh... it just can, ok?
>>24890555>>but this type of dualism is fairly common and not really his fault. just because it's considered normal doesnt justify his low IQ nonsense
>>24890547I like Rules for the Mind and respect his geometry work but his actual philosophic stuff is doo doo.
>>24890582It kinda does. Justification is a normative statement. Appeal to the normal is the very basis of it.
>>24890555The fact you can’t visualize a Chiliagon doesn’t mean that mind exists outside of matter. Come on now. Monists would solve that quite easily as would materialists.
>>24890600I don't know if it exists "outside" matter, but mind does not seem to be reducible to matter. Monists could propose hypotheses all day about how one could be reduced to the other and the other to the one but at the end of the day the gap is universally observed and not even remotely solved.
>>24890603Hylomorphism is a far better proposal from Aristotle than Descartes and his “the pineal gland is the center and you like pilot it doood, you pilot the pineal gland like a guy driving a caaar.”
>>24890609If it helps you solve the apparent gap, more power to you, publish your papers and drive hylomorphism to the top. All I'm saying is that I'm not gonna accept cope about the apparent gap between mind and matter just for the sake of explaining it away. >pineal glandCartesian philosophy is entirely about finding a "centre" subject from which you perform operations towards the objective world. That the brain would work similarly was a fair hypothesis and, again, fairly normal. It were the 1600s. Centuries before they even knew what germs were.
>>24890625>>finding a "centre" nah that was not really an issue since they had God up their sleeve if they could not explain some phenomena, which again signifies how low IQ all that cartesian philosophy actually was.
>>24890692Of course it wasn't an issue, they managed to propose ones both theoretically and physiologically. Anon do you actually know anything about Descartes besides the fact he was a dualist and a theist?
>>24890595It doesn't. Where is there a value in your ideas and notions if they are just about appealing to normal?
>>24890699>>Anon do you actually know anything about Descartes besides the fact he was a dualist and a theist?I do.
>>24890704The goalpost was low-IQ, not value. Value in Cartesian philosophy is that it enables a very tangible subject-object divide and lays grounds to logical positivism and the general skepticism we enjoy today.
>>24890600>MonistsMonism is a fool's errand, justifying premises that should be self-evident were it actually even true to begin with.
>>24890547I'm still blown away how this 17th century French fruitcake still makes philosofags seethe to this day. That's a good feat, if you ask me
>>24890600Monists have to be the biggest retards in philosophy, though.>everything's complicated?>uhhh a-actually no it's not>it's all le one thing>well... because it just is, okay?!
>>24890793Dialectical monism is the only one thats true
>I think therefore I must torture dogsWow I am sure glad we’ve spent the last 400 years disenchanting and turning everything into unliving and unhuman megamachines thanks to the abomination of thought this ugly Frenchmen helped birth to the side of Bacon and Hobbes.
>>24890547>overratednext to no one has been a pure cartesian in like 300 years wtf are you on about? he is remembered for being a PIVOTEL thinker, not an ending point.
>>24890793Monists or just straight up Materialists make more sense than "uhhh everything is two different things and they work together somehow with the pineal gland as the thing connecting the two."
>>24890609>Hylomorphism is a far better proposaltradcath cope, hylomorphism doesn't actually solve anything and is not even entertained by anyone who knows what a hox gene is
>>24890711>>lays grounds to logical positivism and the general skepticism we enjoy today.Not even that. He introduced how cause and effect relations be reduced into simple mechanical objects, which plagued the evolution of science.
>>24891015>>Next to no one has been a pure cartesianThere are still plenty of dualists out there.>>he is remembered for being a PIVOTAL thinker, not an ending point.Look: there are other philosophers who actually predicted how things would go and develop in future, which makes them a great and important figure. What did Descartes do in that regard?
>>24891337>and is not even entertained by anyone who knows what a hox gene isThis statement is quite literally meaningless.
>>24891211You're a monist? Okay, explain multiplicity in a monist worldview.
