3654
|
The pineal gland links soul to body, and unites the two symmetrical sides of the body [Descartes, by PG]
|
|
Full Idea:
The soul is united with the body in just one place, a gland (the pineal) in the centre of the brain. It is placed so that its slightest movement will affect the passions, and it plays the essential role of uniting the two symmetrical sides of the body.
|
|
From:
report of René Descartes (The Passions of the Soul [1649], §31) by PG - Db (ideas)
|
|
A reaction:
See Idea 4862 for Spinoza's nice response to Descartes' proposal. If Descartes had followed brain research for the last four hundred years, at what point would he have wavered? If every single part of the brain seems to 'interact', dualism looks unlikely.
|
4313
|
Are there a few primary passions (say, joy, sadness and desire)? [Descartes, by Cottingham]
|
|
Full Idea:
Descartes says there are six primary passions (wonder, love, hatred, desire, joy and sadness); Spinoza says there are just three (joy, sadness and desire).
|
|
From:
report of René Descartes (The Passions of the Soul [1649]) by John Cottingham - The Rationalists p.172
|
|
A reaction:
A dubious project. However, it is now agreed that there are a few (six?) basic universal facial expressions, to which these passions may correspond.
|
23989
|
There are six primitive passions: wonder, love, hatred, desire, joy and sadness [Descartes, by Goldie]
|
|
Full Idea:
Descartes said there are six primitive passions, namely wonder, love, hatred, desire, joy and sadness. The others are either species of these, or composed of them.
|
|
From:
report of René Descartes (The Passions of the Soul [1649], 353) by Peter Goldie - The Emotions 4 'Evidence'
|
|
A reaction:
[not sure about ref] It's a nice touch to add 'wonder', which doesn't make it onto anyone else's list.
|
2854
|
Prescriptivism says 'ought' without commitment to act is insincere, or weakly used [Hooker,B]
|
|
Full Idea:
Prescriptivism holds that if you think one 'ought' to do a certain kind of act, and yet you are not committed to doing that act in the relevant circumstances, then you either spoke insincerely, or are using the word 'ought' in a weak sense.
|
|
From:
Brad W. Hooker (Prescriptivism [1995], p.640)
|
|
A reaction:
So that's an 'ought', but not a 'genuine ought', then? (No True Scotsman move). Someone ought to rescue that drowning child, but I can't be bothered.
|
16697
|
Time is independent of motion, because God could stop everything for a short or long time [Crathorn, by Pasnau]
|
|
Full Idea:
Suppose God annihilates everything, and then creates something new. The vacant interval could last a shorter or longer time, so there are facts about time independent of facts about motion.
|
|
From:
report of William Crathorn (Sentences [1335], I.16, concl.2) by Robert Pasnau - Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 18.2
|
|
A reaction:
Not very persuasive if God is in some way 'timeless'. Crathorn would have loved Shoemaker's argument, where motionless time is the best explanation, rather than a possible explanation.
|