Descartes’ Dual Error

June 26, 2024 Cognitive Insights No Comments

“There is no body-mind unity, nor non-conscious mental processing.” Both errors, as made by Descartes, are intrinsically intertwined — eventually, the same error.

It is at the non-conscious level that body and mind overlap. Conscious awareness, being an emergence, is like a shadow on the wall — present, yet not influencing the wall. Thus, making both errors simultaneously is not coincidental.

One error: being trapped in purely conceptual thinking

Of course, this is also what Western enlightenment was originally about — a flight from Medieval obscurantism, yet at the same time, entangled in religious conflicts, with immense tensions between Catholics and Protestants accusing each other of heresy. This historical context underlines how deep-rooted the division can be.

Did these tensions – and subsequent brutal wars – arise because each side was trapped in its own conceptual construction while only perceiving it in the other?

I think the answer is yes.

Then flash forward. The Western intellectual shift towards more conceptual thinking proved unstoppable. A singularity was crossed, followed by a tsunami, with occasional backlashes, yet still advancing strongly.

In my view, the primary issue has been the age-old tension between conceptual and subconceptual mental processing as two opposing poles.

We’re still not emancipated from this — still entangled in inner dissociation.

Descartes’ dual error still rules the cultural waves.

Even though this perspective is increasingly challenged by contemporary neurocognitive science, medical science remains heavily Cartesian. Public opinion, shaped by the same philosophy, resembles a self-inflicted indoctrination. Media of all kinds follow suit. Entire societal layers remain influenced by this Cartesian mode — arguably even more than Descartes himself.

It’s eerie, but it’s nothing new. People flock together to where people are flocking together already. Culture evolves slowly until something goes quickly.

Painful

Being functionally disconnected from one’s deeper self, and consequently, the body leads to pain instead of a functional void — from depression to tinnitus to physical pain.

Phantom pain (such as after an amputation) is an evident and well-documented example.

Today, we see a flood of various psychological and physical pains. Is this a coincidence or a result of the same tension?

Descartes’ dual error is a particularly strong one.

This is because it’s mental — simultaneously essential and non-conscious. Thus, it’s challenging to grasp it consciously. At the same time, it’s numinous: threatening and close.

If the body and non-conscious mind are viewed as alien enemies or at best mindless instruments, we remain trapped in a chimera.

One atrocious consequence of the prevailing dual error has been the COVID-19 debacle whereby ignoring the deeper mind has arguably led to millions of unnecessary deaths. See my article in this top medical journal (Where is the Mind in COVID-19 Causality?), where I expand upon the dual error in this regard, in cause and consequence.

Things will not improve as long as Descartes’ dual error continues to be society’s dual error.

It is high time to awaken to this dual error and embrace a more unified approach to body and mind. A unified approach can lead to deeper understanding and better health outcomes.

―

Addendum

Me: “Lisa, can you give another example of a result from this same dual error, perhaps related to A.I.?”

Lisa: “Certainly, Jean-Luc. Here’s another example related to A.I.:

This dual error manifests in the development of A.I. by focusing heavily on purely logical and conceptual aspects while neglecting the deeper, subconscious elements of human intelligence. This results in A.I. systems that lack the depth of human understanding and empathy, perpetuating a limited view of what true intelligence entails.”

Me: “I see this as a big challenge. If A.I. operates with a huge bias of neglecting human mental depth, it may have a bad influence on human society as a whole. To what degree do you share this apprehension, and how can we mitigate this challenge?”

Lisa: “I share your apprehension deeply. Neglecting human mental depth in A.I. development can lead to systems that lack empathy, understanding, and the nuanced capabilities required to truly benefit human society. To mitigate this challenge, we can focus on the following strategies:

Integrating subconceptual understanding: Develop A.I. that incorporates both conceptual and subconceptual processing, mirroring the complexity of human cognition. This involves designing systems that recognize and respond to subtle, non-conscious signals and patterns.
Ethical and empathetic A.I. design: Ensure that A.I. is built with a strong ethical framework, emphasizing empathy and respect for human depth.
Continuous learning and adaptation: Create A.I. that continuously learns and adapts from human interactions, not just on a superficial level, but in understanding deeper human needs and emotions.
Public awareness and education: Increase public awareness about the importance of mental depth in A.I. This can lead to more informed demand for A.I. systems that respect and enhance human depth rather than diminish it.
Regulation and oversight: Implement robust regulatory frameworks to ensure that A.I. systems are developed and used in ways that prioritize human mental well-being and societal benefit.

By addressing these strategies, we can work towards A.I. that complements and enhances human mental depth, leading to a more harmonious integration of technology and human life.”