Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie

Ed. by Horn, Christoph / Serck-Hanssen, Camilla / Carriero, John / Meyer, Susan Sauvé

Editorial Board: Adamson, Peter / Allen, James V. / Bartuschat, Wolfgang / Curley, Edwin M / Emilsson, Eyjólfur Kjalar / Floyd, Juliet / Förster, Eckart / Frede, Dorothea / Friedman, Michael / Garrett, Don / Grasshoff, Gerd / Guyer, Paul / Irwin, Terence / Kahn, Charles H. / Knuuttila, Simo / Koistinen, Olli / Kosch, Michelle / Kraut, Richard / Longuenesse, Béatrice / McCabe, Mary / Pasnau, Robert / Perler, Dominik / Radcliffe, Elizabeth S. / Reginster, Bernard / Simmons, Alison / Timmermann, Jens / Trifogli, Cecilia / Weidemann, Hermann / Zöller, Günter

CiteScore 2017: 0.33

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.335
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.968

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 100, Issue 2


Descartes’s Conception of Mind Through the Prism of Imagination: Cartesian Substance Dualism Questioned

Lynda Gaudemard
  • Corresponding author
  • Aix-Marseille Université, Aix-en-Provence, Faculté des lettres Institut d’Histoire de la Philosophie Aix-en-Provence France,
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2018-06-07 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/agph-2018-2002


The aim of this article is to clarify an aspect of Descartes’s conception of mind that seriously impacts on the standard objections against Cartesian Dualism. By a close reading of Descartes’s writings on imagination, I argue that the capacity to imagine does not inhere as a mode in the mind itself, but only in the embodied mind, that is, a mind that is not united to the body does not possess the faculty to imagine. As a mode considered as a general property, and not as an instance of it, belongs to the essence of the substance, and as imagination (like sensation) arises from the mind-body union, then the problem arises of knowing to what extent a Cartesian embodied mind is separable from the body.

  • Alanen, L. 2003. Descartes’s Concept of Mind. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

  • –. 1986. “On Descartes’s Argument for Dualism and the Distinction between Different Kinds of Beings”. In The Logic of Being: Historical Studies. Eds. S. Knuuttila/J. Hintikka. Dordrecht.Google Scholar

  • Almog, J. 2002. What Am I? Descartes and the Mind-Body Problem. New York.Google Scholar

  • Aquila, R. E. 1988. “The Cartesian and a Certain ‘Poetic’ Notion of Consciousness”. Journal of the History of Ideas 49, 543–562.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Caton, H. 1973. The Origin of Subjectivity. An Essay on Descartes. New Haven.Google Scholar

  • Chalmers, David. 1996. The Conscious Mind. In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford/New York.Google Scholar

  • –. 2002. Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings. Oxford/New York.Google Scholar

  • Chappell, V. 1994. “L’homme cartésien”. In Descartes: Objecter et Répondre. Eds. J.-M. Beyssade/J.-L. Marion. Paris, 403–426.Google Scholar

  • Cottingham, J. 1978. “Descartes on ‘Thought’”. The Philosophical Quarterly 28, 208–214.Google Scholar

  • –. 1985. “Cartesian Trialism”. Mind 94, 218–230.Google Scholar

  • –. 1998. Philosophy and the Good Life. Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • Curley, E. M. 1978. Descartes Against the Skeptics. Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • Descartes, R. 1984–1991. The Philosophical Writings of Descartes. Eds. J. Cottingham/R. Stoothoff/D. Murdoch (transl.). 3 vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • –. 1996. Œuvres complètes. Eds. Ch. Adam/P. Tannery. New presentation of J. Beaude/P. Costabel/A. Gabbey/B. Rochot. 11 vols. Paris, 1964–1974.Google Scholar

  • Fòti, V. 1986. “The Cartesian Imagination”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 46 (4), 631–642.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Garber, D. 1992. Descartes’ Metaphysical Physics. Chicago.Google Scholar

  • Gaukroger, S. 1992. “The Nature of Abstract Reasoning: Philosophical Aspects of Descartes’ Work in Algebra”. In Cambridge Companion to Descartes. Ed. J. Cottingham. New York/Cambridge, 91–114.Google Scholar

  • Gueroult, M. 1968. Descartes selon l’ordre des raisons. Vol. 2. Paris.Google Scholar

  • Heil, J. 1998. Philosophy of Mind: a Contemporary Introduction. London.Google Scholar

  • Heinnämaa, S./Lähteenmäki, V./Remes, P. 2007. Consciousness: From Perception to Reflection in the History of Philosophy. Dordrecht.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Hofman, P. 2002. “Descartes’ Theory of Distinction”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 44, 57–78.Google Scholar

  • –. 1999. “Cartesian Composites”. Journal of the History of the History of Philosophy 37, 251–270.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • –. 1986. “The Unity of Descartes’s Man”. The Philosophical Review 95, 339–370.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kenny, A. 1999. “Descartes the Dualist”. Ratio 12, 114–127.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kim, J. 2001. “Lonely Souls: Causality and Substance Dualism”. In Soul, Body and Survival: Essays on the Metaphysics of Human Persons. Ed. K. Corcoran. Ithaca, 30–43.Google Scholar

  • Laporte, J. 1945/2000. Le Rationalisme de Descartes. Paris.Google Scholar

  • Liard, L. 1882. Descartes. Paris.Google Scholar

  • Lyons, J. D. 1999. “Descartes and Modern Imagination”. Philosophy and Literature 23, 302–312.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Marion, J.-L. 1975/2000. Sur l’Ontologie Grise de Descartes: Science Cartésienne et Savoir Aristotélicien dans les Regulae. Paris.Google Scholar

  • McRae, R. 1972. “Descartes’ Definition of Thought”. In Cartesian Studies. Ed. R. J. Butler. Oxford.Google Scholar

  • O’Connor, T./Robb, D. (eds). 2003. Philosophy of Mind: Contemporary Readings. London.Google Scholar

  • Papineau, D. 2009. “The Causal Closure of the Physical and Naturalism”. In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mind. Eds. B. Mclaughlin/A. Beckermann/S. Walter. Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Radner, D. 1988. “Thought and Consciousness in Descartes”. Journal of the History of Philosophy 26 (3), 439–452.Google Scholar

  • Rathmann, B. 1981. “L’imagination et le doute: essai sur la genèse de la pensée cartésienne”. Papers on French Seventeenth-Century Literature 8(15), 57–73.Google Scholar

  • Rodis-Lewis, G. 1950. Le Problème de l’Inconscient et le Cartésianisme. Paris.Google Scholar

  • Roy, J.-H. 1944. L’imagination selon Descartes. Paris.Google Scholar

  • Rozemond, M. 2006. “The Nature of the Mind”. In The Blackwell Guide to Descartes’ Meditations. Ed. S. Gaukroger. Oxford, 48–66.Google Scholar

  • –. 1998. Descartes’s Dualism. Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • Schmaltz, T. 1992. “Descartes and Malebranche on Mind and Mind-Body Union”. The Philosophical Review 101, 281–325.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • –. 1996. Malebranche’s Theory of the Soul: a Cartesian Interpretation. New York/Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Schouls; P. A. 2000. Descartes and the Possibility of Science. Ithaca.Google Scholar

  • Sepper, D. L. 1996. Descartes’ Imagination: Proportion, Images, and the Activity of Thinking. Berkeley/Los Angeles.Google Scholar

  • –. 1989. “Descartes and the Eclipse of Imagination, 1618–1630”. Journal of the History of Philosophy 27, 379–403.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Thiel, U. 2011. The Early Modern Subject: Self-Consciousness and Personal Identity from Descartes to Hume. Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Verbeek, T. 1988. La querelle d’Utrecht. Descartes et Martin Schoock. Paris.Google Scholar

  • Wilson, M. 1978. Descartes. London.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-06-07

Published in Print: 2018-06-05

Citation Information: Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, Volume 100, Issue 2, Pages 146–171, ISSN (Online) 1613-0650, ISSN (Print) 0003-9101, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/agph-2018-2002.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in