Passion And Soul 'LINK' Full Movie Download

In 1643 Descartes began a prolific written correspondence with Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia, in which he answered her moral questions, especially the nature of happiness, passions, and ethics. Passions of the Soul was written as a synthesis of this exchange.

Amlie Rorty asserts that the examination of the passions present in Descartes' work plays a significant role in illustrating the development of the perception of the cognitive mind in western society. According to her article "From Passions to Emotions and Sentiments", Descartes' need to reconcile the influence of the passions on otherwise rational beings marks a clear point in the advancement of human self-estimation, paralleling the increasingly rational-based scientific method.[1]

Passion And Soul Full Movie Download

DOWNLOAD 🔥 https://bytlly.com/2y3HvL 🔥

It was in this context that Descartes wished to speak of the passions, neither as a moralist nor from a psychological perspective, but as a method of exploring a fundamental aspect of natural science. "My design is not to explain the passions as an Orator", he wrote in a letter to his editor dated August 14, 1649, "nor even as a Philosopher, but only as a Physicist." In doing so, Descartes broke not only from the Aristotelian tradition (according to which the movements of the body originate in the soul), but also the Stoic and Christian traditions which defined the passions as the illnesses of the soul and which dictate that they be treated as such.[2] Descartes thus affirmed that the passions "are all intrinsically good, and that all we have to avoid is their misuse or their excess" (art. 211).[3]

In the context of the mechanistic view of life which was gaining popularity in seventeenth century science, Descartes perceived the body as an autonomous machine, capable of moving independently of the soul. It was from this physiological perception of the body that Descartes developed his theories on the passions of the soul. Formerly considered to be an anomaly, the passions became a natural phenomenon, necessitating a scientific explanation.

The treatise is based on the philosophy developed by Descartes in his previous works, especially the distinction between the body and the soul: the soul thinks (res cogitans) but is incorporeal, while the body is physical (res extensa) but does not think and is primarily defined by its form and movement. This is what is known as Cartesian dualism. In Passions, Descartes further explores this mysterious dichotomy of mind and body.

In Passions of the Soul, Descartes defines the passions as "the perceptions, sensations, or commotions of the soul which we relate particularly to the soul and are caused, maintained, and strengthened by some movement of the spirits" (art. 27).[5] The "spirits" mentioned in this definition are "animal spirits", a notion central to understanding Descartes' physiology. These spirits function in a capacity similar to modern medicine's nervous system. Descartes explains that these animal spirits are produced in the blood and are responsible for the physical stimulation which causes the body to move. In affecting the muscles, for example, the animal spirits "move the body in all the different ways it is capable of" (Passions of the Soul art. 10).[6]

Descartes does not reject the passions in principle; instead, he underlines their beneficial role in human existence. He maintains that humans should work to better understand their function in order to control them rather than be controlled by them. Thus, "[e]ven those who have the weakest souls could acquire absolute mastery over all their passions if they worked hard enough at training and guiding them" (art. 50).[7]

The organization of Descartes' Passions is indicative of the author's philosophy. Applying his famous method to moral philosophy, Descartes represented the problem of the passions of the soul in terms of its simplest integral components. He distinguishes between six fundamentally distinct passions:

It is with these six primary passions (wonder, love, hate, desire, joy, and sadness) that Descartes begins his investigation on their physiological effects and their influence on human behavior. He then follows by combining the six passions to create a holistic picture of the passions.

Additionally, a further distinction between Descartes' writings on physics and those on human nature such as can be found in Passions is their relationship to Aristotelian teleology.[9] While Descartes argues against the existence of a final cause in physics, the nature of his work on examining the origins and functions of desires in the human soul necessitates the existence of a final goal towards which the individual is working.

The problem of the Passions treatise is also the problem of Cartesian dualism. In the first part of his work, Descartes ponders the relationship between the thinking substance and the body. For Descartes, the only link between these two substances is the pineal gland (art. 31), the place where the soul is attached to the body.

The passions that Descartes studies are in reality the actions of the body on the soul (art. 25). The soul suffers the influence of the body and is entirely subject to the influence of the passions. In the manner by which Descartes explains the human body, the animal spirits stimulate the pineal gland and cause many troubles (or strong emotions) in the soul.

The passions attack the soul and force the body to commit inappropriate actions. It was therefore necessary for Descartes to study in the second part of his treatise the particular effects of each separate passion and its manners of manifestation. The study of the passions permits one to better understand and account for these elements which may otherwise disturb a human's rational reasoning capabilities.

At the same time, Descartes' modernity must also be appreciated. Even while outlining the passions and their effect, he never issues an overarching interdiction against them as fatal human defects to be avoided at all costs. He recognizes them as an inherent aspect of humanity, not to be taken as aberrations. Furthermore, the role of the passions on the body is not insignificant. Descartes indicates that they must be harnessed in order to learn which are good and bad for the body, and therefore for the individual (art. 211 and 212).

Thus the majority of the work is devoted to enumerating the passions and their effects. He begins with the six basic passions and then touches on the specific passions which stem from their combination. For example, contempt and esteem are two of the passions derived from the basic passion of admiration (art. 150). The passion which Descartes valued the most is generosity for the positive effect it has on the individual (art. 153).

Objection 1. It would seem that there is no passion in the soul. Because passivity belongs to matter. But the soul is not composed of matter and form, as stated in the I:75:5. Therefore there is no passion in the soul.

Objection 3. Further, passion is the road to corruption; since "every passion, when increased, alters the substance," as is stated in Topic. vi, 6. But the soul is incorruptible. Therefore no passion is in the soul.

On the contrary, The Apostle says (Romans 7:5): "When we were in the flesh, the passions of sins which were by the law, did the work in our members." Now sins are, properly speaking, in the soul. Therefore passions also, which are described as being "of sins," are in the soul.

I answer that, The word "passive" is used in three ways. First, in a general way, according as whatever receives something is passive, although nothing is taken from it: thus we may say that the air is passive when it is lit up. But this is to be perfected rather than to be passive. Secondly, the word "passive" is employed in its proper sense, when something is received, while something else is taken away: and this happens in two ways. For sometimes that which is lost is unsuitable to the thing: thus when an animal's body is healed, and loses sickness. At other times the contrary occurs: thus to ail is to be passive; because the ailment is received and health is lost. And here we have passion in its most proper acceptation. For a thing is said to be passive from its being drawn to the agent: and when a thing recedes from what is suitable to it, then especially does it appear to be drawn to something else. Moreover in De Generat. i, 3 it is stated that when a more excellent thing is generated from a less excellent, we have generation simply, and corruption in a particular respect: whereas the reverse is the case, when from a more excellent thing, a less excellent is generated. In these three ways it happens that passions are in the soul. For in the sense of mere reception, we speak of "feeling and understanding as being a kind of passion" (De Anima i, 5). But passion, accompanied by the loss of something, is only in respect of a bodily transmutation; wherefore passion properly so called cannot be in the soul, save accidentally, in so far, to wit, as the "composite" is passive. But here again we find a difference; because when this transmutation is for the worse, it has more of the nature of a passion, than when it is for the better: hence sorrow is more properly a passion than joy.

Reply to Objection 1. It belongs to matter to be passive in such a way as to lose something and to be transmuted: hence this happens only in those things that are composed of matter and form. But passivity, as implying mere reception, need not be in matter, but can be in anything that is in potentiality. Now, though the soul is not composed of matter and form, yet it has something of potentiality, in respect of which it is competent to receive or to be passive, according as the act of understanding is a kind of passion, as stated in De Anima iii, 4.

Reply to Objection 3. This argument is true of passion accompanied by transmutation to something worse. And passion, in this sense, is not found in the soul, except accidentally: but the composite, which is corruptible, admits of it by reason of its own nature. 2351a5e196