Marcel+on+Mind-Body+Dualism

= Gabriel Marcel and Mind Body Dualism = = = = **//__Abstract __//** = Gabriel Marcel was a philosopher who one could group into the existential category; although we would find out later that a Christian Existentialist would be a better title. Throughout his life Marcel spent much of his time writing on the idea of secondary reflection. This concept was important to him because this was the only way to truly acknowledge the presence of others in this life. When other existential philosophers like Albert Camus were busy trying to explain how meaningless life was, Marcel on the contrary looked to explain our existence in slightly less bleak of terms. Secondary reflection was the tool he used to do so. Where the normal reflection all humans undertake which he deems primary reflection, includes all of our senses and knowledge of science, secondary reflection goes deeper than this first level. Undergoing secondary reflection allows us to acknowledge the presence of other beings, or even things we can’t see, God for example. It is this type of reflection that is necessary to see mind body dualism through Marcel’s eyes. He sees past the physical brain and distinguishes between two separate entities, our brain encased by our skull, and the non physical mind. In this paper we will discuss: exactly who Gabriel Marcel, his impact on philosophy, what mind body dualism is, how Marcel explained this topic, and some common criticisms of his view. = **//__Who Was Gabriel Marcel? __//** =

“On a grassroots level we say that man can touch more than he can grasp.” --Gabriel Marcel  Gabriel Marcel was born in Paris, France on December 7 1889. His mother died when he was only four years of age, he was consequently raised by his father and aunt who eventually married. “ He excelled in school, but did so without enjoying his studies prior to his encounter with philosophy” (Stanford). A very smart man he would prove to be indeed, receiving his agrégation in philosophy when he was only twenty-one years old. This was a type of certificate that allowed him to teach in higher education. He used this and taught philosophy in Sens, Paris and Montpellier before moving on to other career paths. These included playwright, drama and music critic as well as director for some of his own plays. As he moved through these careers he began making a name for himself through his philosophical works which lead to some meetings he became famous for.

 These meetings occurred on Friday nights at his home and were aptly named “Friday Evenings.” Paul Ricoeur, Emmanuel Levinas, Jean Wahl, and Jean-Paul Sartre were among the many noted philosophers who attended these gatherings at one time or another. These informal gatherings were an occasion for engaged thinkers from a variety of perspectives to discuss together various philosophical themes, frequently ones Marcel himself was working on that week” (Stanford). While the members of this group were deemed “existentialists” they certainly did not agree on all of the philosophical topics discussed. Lying at the heart of these disagreements was the concept of more than the physical world existing.

 Marcel was raised an atheist, but joined the Catholic Church in 1929. Where some of the other existential philosophers argued under this atheistic premise, Marcel in his belief in secondary reflection felt that, as the quote above alludes to, there are some things in the world we can not see physically. Through this train of thought Marcel left his mark on philosophy and the topic of mind body dualism. Before discussing his views on this concept specifically it would be sufficient to discuss what exactly is meant by the term mind body dualism.

= //__ Introduction To The Mind Body Connection __// =  Mind body dualism first entered the realm of philosophical discussion in 1641. Rene Descartes was the first to publish on the subject. //De homine// was the first of his works to introduce the topic. This piece focused on physiological psychology. It focused on human’s external responses to specific stimuli and their interaction with the nerve fibrils of the brain. This outlined the mind/body interactionism that was late expounded upon by later thinkers. He believed that “the rational soul, an entity distinct from the body and making contact with the body at the pineal gland, might or might not become aware of the differential outflow of animal spirits brought about through the rearrangement of the interfibrillar spaces” (Wozniak 1). It supposes that when awareness occurs, the mind affects the body. He mistakenly held that the pineal gland was uniquely human, and acted as the node between the soul and the body.

When later philosophers developed this theory further, it became known as the mind-body problem. The problem is distinguishing between the physical and non-physical world. One way of answering this quandary is through dualism. However, there are many other ways that answer the problem. Understanding these responses serves as a basis to comprehend Marcel’s dualistic views.

 Psychophysical parallelism contends that mental and physical events are unrelated entities. Each aspect can cause similar events but not the other. They do, however, transpire in parallel processes. Nervous and conscious processes occur as part of separate larger systems. “Both must be regarded as belonging to a more comprehensive system of conditions; and it is within this system as a whole that the reason of their connection is to be sought” (Stout 22-27). To better illustrate the implications of such a view, the act of touching a hot stove with a hand will be analyzed. The hand is quickly removed because of the searing pain felt, and then a decision to be more careful in the future occurs. The physical act of touching the stove causes the withdrawal but not the decision. Whereas the pain, preceded by some mental event, initiates the decision but not the withdrawal.

A second hypothesis is materialism. It was originated in pre-Socratic Greece, eventually leading to the theory of atomism of Democritus and Epicurus n the 4th century BCE. It argues that everything happens in accordance with the laws of nature. “The beginning materialists have always based their theory on the best scientific evidence at hand, rather than on some putative ‘first philosophy’ waiting to be discovered through abstract philosophical reasoning” (Vitzthum). It focuses on the direct observation of nature and the world. This also adheres to the study of the biological functions of human beings. Idealism concentrates on the individual experiences within the world. The three main tenets of this school of thought are: the world is as it appears to be rather than what it truly is, reflection is best classified in terms of self-aware thought, thought relates each individual experience to what it communicates instead of some pre-determined answer (Idealism). The true state of reality can be understood through consciousness and reason.

The final theory is that of dualism. It holds that there are two distinct realities. The physical deals with such things as size, shape, and color. The mental side deals with nonphysical characteristics like immateriality. Plato believed that the body was a “prisoner” of the mind or soul. While the body dissolved into its original parts, the mind or soul cannot die because it is not composed of a material substance. This in effect, provides hope for some sort of life after death. The aforementioned Descartes later utilized this in his work. With a broad understanding of dualism, the work of Gabriel Marcel can now be explored. = //__ Marcel’s Mind Body Dualism __// =  When examining Marcel’s view on this mind body dualism, it’s important to first analyze his worldviews and the implications such beliefs have upon the overall construction of his theory. Although he did not disagree with Descartes on the fundamentals of his supposition, it is within the scope and depth that Marcel’s own views clash. The initial point of discussion is Marcel’s distinction between the physical and nonphysical realms. His does so through a type of dialectical thinking. Essentially this hinges on a debate between two differing viewpoints, seeking some corresponding focal point. This way of thinking utilizes primary and secondary reflection. Primary reflection centers more on the surface view of the world. This would involve such studies as science and mathematics. On a deeper level, secondary reflection goes to a level of human experience that cannot be described by traditional concrete forms of investigation. “Marcel’s identification of the human experiences that are beyond the range of primary reflection, such as the experience of fidelity, led him in the general direction of the transcendent” (Sweetman 69). The experiences are not limited to fidelity, but the full spectrum of human encounters: love, passion, and pain.

With this initial distinction between these separate realms, he enters the discussion of the metaproblem. In response, he believes that the world is “broken” and too complex to fully grasp on merely a physical level. Although his views on the broken world are vast, it is best encapsulated through the importance of function. Human experience has been reduced to their biological and social functions, which in effect is destroying the inherent value of human life. In his opinion, this functional view of the world is what causes the diminishing value of individual human experience. “Marcel’s notion of the metaproblem is a theory of rationality, which claims the existence of a participant intelligibly. Certain meanings, he argues, appear only through participant experience of a phenomenon and these meanings would be missed by mere external or impersonal observation” (Cooney 127). When one reduces participant experience to function, they fail to capture the nonphysical phenomenons that give life meaning.

 Now that his view of the world has been explained, his perception on Descartes theory on mind body dualism can be better understood. “Descartes holds a ‘container’ view of the mind. According to this view, the mind is full of ideas of all kinds, which are essentially shut off from the world, and his task is to show that thee ideas do actually reflect the way things really are” (Sweetman 13). Although Descartes introduces the concept of the mind, he fails in his attempt at relating it to the physical realm. As such, he introduces ideas, but does not expound upon them to create this symbiotic relationship between the mind and body. Marcel attempts to further explain this bond on the basis of space and time.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">“[Marcel’s] claim is not simply that the mind does not, as we have all thought, grasp reality immediately in clear and distninct ideas, but that this grasping takes place over a period of time. Rather, his point is that the self does not naturally experience the world and does not come to know the world in this way at all” (Sweetman 18). Whereas Descartes leaves the mind and body to interact on a superficial level, Marcel goes further by explaining that the mind body experience does not come naturally because humanity is incapable of grasping this concept. Marcel diverges from the concrete approach taken by Descartes, as he focuses on the existential qualities of this dualism characterized by the abstraction of thought. “[These ideas] do not come between the subject and the world, as Descartes clear and distinct ideas do. The existential subject experiences the world conceptually only at a level of abstraction, which by its very nature is derivative, and which does not take the ‘situated involvement’ of the existential subject into account” (Sweetman 18). Descartes asserts that there is concrete reciprocity between the mind and body, while Marcel holds this to be too audacious of an interpretation. When viewed through the existential lens, it is impossible to argue for the material causality of mind and body. It is imperative that the bond between the two realms remains within the abstract. People congregate around this Cartesian way of thinking because of its scientific transparency. There is a method when describing mind body interaction through logical terms. It is hard to accept things for the way they are. Marcel argues that some things must be left to the transcendent, because mind body dualism cannot be explained in empirical terms. Because this view requires a “leap of faith” in accepting some form of abstraction, many philosophers have criticized the lack of overall transparency and inability to quantify any veracity to this theory. = //__ Common Critiques On Mind Body Dualism __// = <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">While there could be many considered criticisms of mind body dualism, for the purposes of this analysis focusing on the main two critiques will suffice. The two criticisms we will focus on are materialism and parallelism. While both of these are considered alternative ways of thinking in regards to worldview, they are all mutually exclusive, if one is to be true then by the very nature of philosophy the others must be false. In this section both critiques will be discussed in order to finalize the investigation of this topic.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-align: center;">"//Our life on earth is, and ought to be, material and carnal. But we have not yet learned to manage our materialism and carnality properly; they are still entangled with the desire for ownership.//" - Edward M. Forster <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;"> As the quote above alludes to in the materialist’s mind, our existence on this earth is as we see it. Using Marcel’s terminology, these thinkers view the world solely through primary reflection. Science and mathematics are the extent of the materialist philosopher’s scope. When speaking on the topic of the mind body relationship, the discussion is brief. When the big picture is reduced to nothing but one can physically grasp, there is no room for a connection between mind and body to exist. For that matter because one cannot see the mind optically it does not exist, only our brains and bodies. “Substance thinking and substance extended are one in the same substance…This truth seems to have been dimly recognized by those Jews who maintained that God, God’s intellect, and the things understood by God are identical.” (Spinoza 31). This description adequately illustrates the core of materialist thought, there is no distinction between thought and the person thinking said thought.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Whereas materialism completely denies the existence of the nonphysical realm, parallelism by contrast accepts the existence of both realms, but denies any interaction between the two. “There is absolutely no connection between the body and the soul at any point whatever, or else the soul is through the nerves present to all the body. This means that the physical imminent to the physical. To deny this is to go back to the Cartesian position, and make a miracle out of the whole matter” (Dewey 104). As Dewey aptly illustrates, those who follow the doctrine of parallelism believe that there are two distinct entities, the physical and nonphysical like that of dualism. However, the distinction lies within the connection between the two separate parts. Dualism states an apparent separation exists, but some connection occurs on an abstract level. Parallelism, on the other hand, follows that there is no relationship between the two. “Because we can doubt that bodies exist while being certain that minds exist, we discover that mind, or though, is not a mode of body” (Rozemond 45). The main criticism is that there is no empirical proof that something abstract can interact with the physical world. = **//__ Conclusion __//** = <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"> After fully developing Marcel’s approach to the mind body problem, while also examining counterarguments, it becomes evident that his ideas are strongly influenced by his Christian values. His beliefs lead him to this “leap of faith” into the transcendent and abstract, which many other philosophers are unwilling to adhere to. In summation, the mind body problem has plagued mankind for centuries, and will continue to do so…[|FOREVER]

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%; text-align: center;">Works Cited <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;"> Cooney, William. Contributions of Gabriel Marcel to Philosophy: a Collection of Essays.Lewiston, N.Y., U.S.A.: E. Mellen, 1989. Print. Dewey, John. “Soul and Body.” The Philosophy of the Body; Rejections of Cartesian Dualism.Chicago: Quadrangle, 1970. Print.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">"Idealism." Changing Minds and Persuasion -- How We Change What Others Think, Believe,Feel and Do. Web. 05 Dec. 2010. [].

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Rozemond, Marleen. "Descarte's Case for Dualism." The Rationalists: Critical Essays on Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999. Print.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Spinoza, Benedict. "Of the Nature and Origin of the Mind." The Philosophy of the Body; Rejections of Cartesian Dualism. Chicago: Quadrangle, 1970. Print.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;"> Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. "Gabriel (-Honoré) Marcel (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)." 14 July 2010. Web. 05 Dec. 2010. [[[|http://plato]. stanford.edu/entries /marcel/#1]].

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Stout, G. F. "A Manual Of Psychology." ChestofBooks.com. Web. 05 Dec. 2010. [].

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Sweetman, Brendan.The Vision of Gabriel Marcel. New York: Rodopi, 2008.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Vitzthum, Richard C. "Materialism." Web. 06 Dec. 2010. [].

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;"> Wozniak, Robert H. "Mind and Body: Rene Déscartes to William James" Bryn Mawr College, Serendip1995. <[]> = =