How many "philosophical parts" is divided a person? Is it just dualism/monism?
By missak
@missak (3311)
Spain
July 10, 2007 7:41am CST
This was a long discussion from early philosophers, and it is still an interesting debat.
-Most atheists and materialists claim what is called monism: the person is just formed of what we can see/touch etc: the physical body.
-Most religious or spiritual philosophers divide the person in two parts: the soul or spirit (everlasting and the main part of the person), and the physical body (a less important part of the body since it dies). This is the most extended dualism.
-Some philosophers with an atheistic, materialist or cientific worldview, have created another form of "dualism", that after some thought developing is called the cybernetic theory: according to thoose, a person is composed of a body and a mind, both physical and both die. The mind is placed in the brain and is where the idea of the self and all other ideas are formed, and the mind rules most body actions.
-When I read this, I thought: why not a "trialism"? The person could be formed of three parts: the body (physical and die), the mind (semi-physical, maybe last as fluctuation of thoughts), and the soul/spirit (metaphysical, somehow eternal). The mind would be here to translate the abstract soul meanings of a person into concrete thoughts that the body would turn into physical actions. After researching a little, I have found that there are some philosophies in that direction also, included maybe early Jewish teachings.
-In my research I have found that non Western cultures have totally different and interesting thoughts about this. The best example is the Yoruba culture, which divided the person in 6 parts. Modern Yoruba thoughts divide the person in 5 parts, they no longer believe in the shadow as an important part (old teachings took the shadow as the part of a person where reside the obscure thougts/facts that follow each one everywhere). Here you can read about the other 5 subdivisions of the person: http://www.awoifa.com/?p=80 . I don't totally agree with the way it is explained there, but it is a good refference. In short: Ache (ego, power with free will, equilibrated with Ori), Ori (the destiny or spiritual path of a person), Iwa (character, mind), Ewa (body), Ona (art, ability of creation).
So what are for you the subdivisions of the person? One,two or more? What are their names and what are they for? Do you know other different conceptions about this topic?
5 people like this
7 responses
@missak (3311)
• Spain
27 Jul 07
Ok, the evidences are the existance of creativity, invention and free will. These actions are against any rule, thus, they are against physics which are based on rules. The brain is also based on rules, and the soul is the source for thoose actions: creativity, invention and free will.
We have been long discussing about thoose terms, and I know for you they do have rules so they are inside physics and caused in the mind. So I will simplify the discussion to just one term: "new". Can it be something new in the world, something that never existed (althought it has some relation to previous existances). If the answer is yes (and I think it is much easier to prove that it is), then this "new" thing has to find a new place in the existance schemes (i.e. alimentice chain, physical rules... ) So at least there is a moment in which there is no rules, no "default" for this being.
The best example is the human being itself. Mamals act similar to other previous beings (i.e. dinosaurs) but I hope you agree that no other being acted like human being, or at least there is no evidence. So, at one moment in the Earth history, it simply appeared a being that was against all existent rules. This being, human being, had to find his place in the world thanks to metaphysics (otherwise said, inventing and making decisions, creating new things, new experiences and new purposes that no other being would have on his shemes, instincts etc).
@missak (3311)
• Spain
19 Jul 07
Well, you are right, this is a good fast refutation... unless I find actions that can't be explained by the mind (I assume you are dualist mind-body, right?). The main difference would be that the mind is attained to physical rules and die with the brain (as you stated elsewhere) while the soul would be metaphysical and eternal. Given thoose definitions, we couldn't use Occam's razor :P
1 person likes this
@sreevasu (2717)
• India
10 Jul 07
Missak, I am from Kerala, the southern most state of India. Here lived a great scholar, a Hindu theologian, Sankaracharya, who advocated 'Advaita' (non-dual) philosophy.
I shall give you some references, which could of use to see the eastern/Indian concept:
http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/
http://www.sankaracharya.org/
http://www.dlshq.org/saints/sankara.htm
1 person likes this
@Lydia1901 (16351)
• United States
19 Jul 07
Well, that is so interesting to hear. I do not think that I have ever seen it that way before. Thanks for pointing it out by the way.
1 person likes this
@urbandekay (18278)
•
11 Jul 07
Many monist philosophies unintentionally involve a form of dualism. Personally, I waver between monism and property dualism, neither of which I see as incompatible with belief.
Of course, quite what counts as dualism is unclear as soon as one strays from the idea of substance dualism. Many forms of dualism (And for that matter many forms of monism) are incoherent, as least in the manner they are formulated.
all the best urban
1 person likes this
@Healthkeep (996)
• Israel
11 Jul 07
Funny. I have an exsam in philosophy on thursday - exactly on the Mind-Body theories...
I have come to the conclusion that there is only our body. We invented the concepts of soul in order to deal with the phnomenons we did not understand, and made woeds like love, hate etc. to categorize the macro - the outcome of the neuronal activity.
It is exactly like we once thought demons were responsible for illness, and sick people were thuoght to be possesed - and we now know better : it is microbes and viruses that cause the illness, and noone in the modern world speaks in terms of demons to describe illness.
1 person likes this
@EvanHunter (4026)
• United States
11 Jul 07
I have heard some of this before. I think there is definately more to the body than just what we feel and live of the moment we can move back and forward in time and have the exact same reactions or feelings.
To me we are of body, mind (thought) and emotions (feelings) and soul. I think spirituality comes in when we realise that thought controls are emotions and body. We need to be ever mindful and meditate and pray on the positive to have a healthy body and emotions.
Here is an example think about someone slapping you in the face. Think about this persons look of anger and disgust as they do it. Right than did you picture did you have a negative feeling? Did you think of wanting to retaliate against them?
The second example is think of the same thing happening but this time you know the person and they were very abused and you said something very hurtfull to them by mistake.
Obviously the two situations are very much the same but they spark different emotions completely one anger and the other sympathy and sadness. All that was just done with thought! Being mindful of our surroundings and meditating on it can cause us to be better not only for our own selves but for those around us too.
1 person likes this
@kitchenwitchoftupper (2290)
• United States
10 Jul 07
Missak, You have totally gone and done it this time, dear one. Maybe it's because I'm old, maybe it's because I had too good of a time in the 60s and 70s, or maybe it's because it's still morning and I haven't had enough caffeine; but whatever it is, this discussion is way above my head! I anxiously await all of the replies you get. ~Donna
1 person likes this
