08000046
Why might it be advantageous for psychology to adopt a Cartesian perspective on the self? Rene Descartes, French philosopher, was the person whose rationalistic views have emanated on and shaped development of modern psychology; the psychology that encounters a quantitative methodology in the research method and tries to explain human behavior by looking at the cognitive processes. The Aim of this paper is critical evaluation of the Cartesian credo regarding the subject of the self, and its impact into the field of psychology . The arguments will be drawing from the first two of the six meditations that Descartes wrote in the “Meditation on First Philosophy” as an attempt to solve the existence problem, in which he tries to find sources of universal truths.
Present paper has been organised in fallowing way: Firstly it will give a brief historical overview into the Cartesian metaphysical endowers in searching for the truth that contributed to the birth of maxima: “Cogito ergo sum” (I think, therefore I am). Next, it will turn attention on to the Cartesian perspective of the self. And finally, will try to answer the question postulated in the title of this paper, drawing conclusion from some of the disciplines of psychology: research, cognitive and abnormal.
Descartes’ ideology tries to find absolute truth regarding the existence, the truth that cannot be question, since only that kind of truth will constitute an absolute truth i.e. unquestionable. Above effort is characterised by scepticism, position that require doubting everything until the point of exhaustion of question, where no any doubt is produce , Descartes writes: “it will be sufficient to justify the rejection of the whole if I shall find in each some ground of doubt ” (Descartes
1996/1641, p10 )
Through first meditation, Descartes tries to look anew on everything that he had known so far. This phenomenological position leads him to conclusion that he cannot be sure of existence of anything. The senses for instance, by which knowledge about the world is obtain, now appear to Page 1 of 7
08000046 deceive him. He writes: “ All that up to the present time I have accepted as most true and certain I have learned either from the senses or through the senses; but it is sometimes proved to me that the senses are deceptive, and it is wiser not to trust entirely to anything by which we have once
been deceived,” (Descartes, 1996/1641, p19).
Moreover, dreams becomes to question existence of reality further. The boundary between what constitute to be a dream and what reality is blur, according to Descartes human being is not aware of dreaming; unconsciousness have no existence at that time: “ I perceive so clearly that there exist no certain marks by which the state of waking, can ever be distinguished form sleep, (...) and in amazement I almost persuade myself that I am now dreaming ” (Descartes1996/1641
p11). Descartes further assume, that the perception of the external world must be deceived i.e. purposefully elucidate by some powerful entity: demon or God, this gave Descartes additional arguments further question the role of senses.
Mentioned metaphysical scepticism initially seems to show that there cannot be any universal truth regarding existence, in other words that there is no single objects which would remain without any doubts as real. The breakthrough took place when Decartes focused his thoughts in the second mediation on the doubts per se., which let him concluded that doubting i.e. thinking, must be something he can be sure. Descartes further conclude that thought is omnipresent whether someone is dreaming or deceived by demon, since person must think in order to dream or to be deceived: ” I am exist, since, I am deveived; and led him deceives me as he may, he can never bring it about that I am nothing, so long as I shall be conscious that I am something ”(Descartes1996/1641 p14)
Above quotation shows as well that there must be an agent that is deceived or dreams. The agent is the “I”, If agent doubts , he/she at the same time think , because “I” thinks, “I” must also exist, this builds the foundation of the Cartesian self, self that is “disembodied” since perception of the body per se. can be deceived, Descartes doubts existence of his own body:
Page 2 of 7
08000046 “ I am therefore, precisely speaking, only a thinking thing, that is, a mind(...).I am however a real thing,
and
really
existent;
but
what
thing?
The
answer
was,
a
thinking
thing”
(Descartes,1996/1641 p15-16).
The breakthrough, in terms of future on the psychology as a discipline and science in general, took place when Descartes “separated” mind from the body (Cartesian dualism). From this point the existence is determine by two substances: thinking, not material and devoid of continuity (mind, psyche or soul) and unconscious, characterized by the continuity (body, which in Cartesian understanding works like a machine, constituted of different parts that works together ). The mind’s only function is to think, all other functions, like perceiving, reproduction, movement, all dealt with by the body.(Tatarkiewicz 2005). According to Descartes, only human being is in the possession of these two aforementioned substances: body and mind ( ghost is the machine), whereas other existing objects, together with animals constituted only form the body.
Descartes further explain that the mind and the body interact with each other. The nature of this interaction is not direct, mind may influence direction of the processes that happen in the body and vice versa (Tatarkiewicz 2005). By that approach to the nature of the self, Descartes have opened the debate about nature and nurture, that is omnipresent in variety of psychological aspects associated for example with human development.
Descartes argues that the knowledge about existence of something cannot came through senses since they deceive us, as was mentioned earlier in this paper, for that reason the only source of knowledge for the men is men it-self through cogito (thinking) , this Descartes very well enraptured in the wax analogy. A wax despite changing its physical characteristics when heated (shape, state of aggregation or smell), will be still perceived as the wax regardless of the changes. The wax’s example illustrates something more, it shows that what characterizes physical objects in general is the continuum of its existence, which change through time, this help cogito formulate a conclusions that builds knowledge and understanding about world. Once the knowledge has been settled, remains greatly unchangeable, since knowledge is ingrained in the mind (Tatarkiewicz 2005).
Page 3 of 7
08000046 The arguments presented in the previous paragraph indicates that self is constant as Descartes assumed, there is devoid of continuum, since curved by the constant ideas, which in terms constitute a core of the existence, core identity. Without such a core, person’s identity would change in relation to the new experiences, situations, as Hume (1739). would argue, this would caused that human being behaviour could not be predictable. the approach to the self proposed by Descartes, solves the problem of personal identity, which is concern with the question how it is possible that the self remain the same over a lifespan despite psychological and physical changes that the person undergoes, this approach had helped developmental psychology develop.
Mind, is the only marker of the truth for the self by which self gain knowledge (ideas). Sensory sensations are useful in terms of the survival ( what is beneficial or dangerous) but do not constitute a direct link by which truth could be obtained . Furthermore, senses in Cartesian terms, plays only an instrumental role: visual sensation helps mind in realisation of its own innate ideas, the ideas that was “born” together with the self. Apart from the innate ideas, Descartes mentions other presented in the mind: factitious and adventitious ideas(Tatarkiewicz 2005). Former relates to the ideas that are constructed by the person in form of imaginations or illusions, whereas latter comes from the experience of the world. That kind of embraced of the mind in the Cartesian notion shows firstly that the self is shaped by the forces that are twofold in nature: innate and acquired, which open the debate about the nature and nurture and shows at the same time that the self cannot be reduced to a simple cause and effect interaction. Secondly, this shows an importance of individual differences in cognition like for example perception of visual illusions or during remembering.
According to Descartes what differ human being from the animals is the possession of the conscious mind or what he refers to as a soul. Taking into account the etymology of the word psychology, which originates from Greek where psyche refers to the soul whereas logy to the knowledge, it is become obvious that psychology is the study of mind (Gross, 2005)
Page 4 of 7
08000046 As was stresses earlier, the most important issue from psychological point of view was to “disembody” the mind as Descartes did. This allowed for the existence of two substances: mind ( psyche) that has core and is innate and the body. If, as Hume (1739) would argue, there was no self with the fix core, then the development of psychology as a science would not be possible to the extent that is present nowadays. Human psyche would be perceived as unstable and by this investigation (the logy) of such a mind would not lead to any conclusions, no theory could be built. Moreover, if Psychology was seen from Hume perspective, it would be a collection of case studies where no general knowledge regarding human being behaviour could be derived form.
Turning now to some more practical aspects of Cartesian self in modern psychology. Looking, for example, at abnormal psychology, which is concerned with the study of unusual patterns in human behaviour (Gross 2005) , without the established self-concept it would be impossible to distinguish what is normal from what is deviant in observable behaviour. As Descartes stated, some ideas in the human mind are innate, given form God, for that reason these ideas must be beneficial for the self, and should not be directed toward harming the self. Although as Descartes postulated, the self is shaped by the interaction between mind and the body,
the bodily
perception of the external world constitute the source of adventitious ideas (not necessarily beneficial for the self)that might result that the core self will be lost.
On the other hand, Descartes claims that he is the only person that can fully understand his own mind i.e. his own self, which could contradict the whole industry of associated with the counselling or therapy that encounter possibility of help that can came from outside of the self. However, looking closer at the variety of method applied in the psychological help, it can be notified that in many of approaches therapist plays a passive role only guiding individual in reaching the pure, innate core self that could have been “contaminated” by the adventitious ideas . Taking an example of person centred therapy, which helps individuals, through restating and paraphrasing clients own thought that are spoken (Rogers 1967), to come up with the solution of
Page 5 of 7
08000046 the problem. The only problem with such an approach is that Descartes does not comprehend unconsciousness, for him mind is conscious, since we are consciously aware of our existence. “ I am I exist, is necessarily true each time that I pronounce it, or that I mentally conceive it ” (Descartes 1996/1641 p.14)
From the Cartesian dualism, it is known that body and the mind correspondent with each other, as was outlined in present paper, this enable researchers in the field of psychology to measure a cognitive processes that take place in the mind, which can be manifested by the bodily changes like for example heart rates or reaction times. Moreover, above approach allows scientist to think about physical aspects of the body in relation to the thoughts and perceptions, which enable objective observation and experimentation in psychology.
The purpose of present paper was to look at the Descartes philosophical reasoning regarding the Self in relation to the psychology. The main conclusion that was draw from the analysis of Descartes meditations (first and the second) constitute as follow: the development of the research method could not be possible without Cartesian dualism, self as a core enable theories of psychology to evolved as well as enrapture individualistic characteristics of the self. All above example, proof that the adaptation of Cartesian self, help in development of a study of mind i.e. psychology.
Words: 2140 Page 6 of 7
08000046
References:
Descartes, R. (1641/1996). Meditations On First Philosophy(Rev. ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press. (Originally published in 1641). th
Gross, R. (2005). Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour (5 ed). Kent: Hodder Arnold Hume D. (1739). A Treatise of Human Nature Section IV: Of Personal Identity In Schultz, D., P, Schultz, S., E. (2008). A History of Modern Psychology. Ninth Edition, Thompson Learning Inc: Belmont Rogers C. R & Stevens B. (1967) Person to Person: The problem of Being Human . London: Souvenir Press. Tatarkiewicz, W. (2005) Historia Filozofii, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warszawa
Page 7 of 7
