Occasionalism is one of the philosophical currents that understand the body and mind as separate entities. That is, it is a dualistic perspective that questions the possibility that body and mind are equally constitutive elements of the human being.
In this article we explain in an introductory way what dualism is, and what the perspective we call occasionalism is about.
Descartes’ dualistic thought
Dualism is a philosophical position that is based on the idea that the mind and body are two separate entities. In other words, the mind does not feel, just as the body does not think. Descartes came to doubt everything except his ability to think with which, what the body felt remained in the background.
René Descartes is generally recognized as the greatest exponent of modern dualism, since he was the first philosopher to oppose the reality of the mind with that of the body (that of the brain).
For him, the mind exists independently of the body, therefore, it has its own substance. This substance, in the religious-scientific context of Descartes, can be of three types: interactionist (which allows mental processes to have effects on the body); parallelist (mental causes only have mental effects that pretend to be physical, but are not); and finally an occasional type substance, which we will explain below.
Occasionalism: an explanation of causality
For Descartes, the occasionalist substance is that which does not allow the interaction between the material and the immaterial terrain. The relationship between these is impossible, because there is an external entity that makes that the events that we understand as “cause-effect” occur. This entity is God, and it is only through his intervention that the mind and body can be connected.
Thus, occasionalism is a philosophical position that, in addition to establishing that the mind and the body are separate; It also establishes that nothing that we perceive as a “cause-effect” relationship is really linked to a cause outside of God.
Causes are nothing other than the occasion for God to produce certain events, which we have called “effects.” For example, in an A->B relationship; Event A is not a cause, but rather it is the occasion for God to produce event B, which is what we experience and translate as “the effect.”
What we know as “cause” is only apparent, it is always occasional (that is, it depends on the specific opportunity). In turn, the event that we perceive as an effect, It is the result of God’s decision. Thus, the true cause is always hidden from our knowledge. As it is given in advance by God, and for the occasion that is presented to him; We, human beings, cannot know it, we can simply experience it, in the form of an effect.
But, remembering that God, the mind and knowledge at this time were closely related, what this means is that, for occasionalism, our mental processes, beliefs, thoughts, intentions, do not generate attitudes, emotions or behaviors. ; Rather, the congruence between these processes is facilitated by a divine entity.
Human beings cannot fully know this divine entity has vision and will of its own, and from there it moves all material things.
Nicolas Malebranche, key author
The French philosopher Nicolas Malebranche is one of the greatest exponents of occasionalism. He lived between 1628 and 1715 and is recognized as one of the representative intellectuals of the illustration.
Initially, Malebranche followed the dualistic postulates of Descartes’ rationalism, which were being developed in a century where reason was closely combined with religious beliefs. Science, philosophy and Christianity were not completely separate from each other, as they are now.
Within his postulates, Malebranche He tried to reconcile the thoughts of Descartes with those of Saint Augustine and in this way demonstrate that God’s active role in all aspects of the world could be demonstrated through the doctrine we call “Occasionalism.”
Although he tried to distance himself from Descartes’ proposals, there are several contemporary philosophers who consider that he should be considered within their own tradition, as well as along with Spinoza and Leibniz. However, other authors consider that Malebranche’s thought is more radical than that of Descartes. The latter considered that at some point, the body and soul were connected, and this point was the pineal gland.
Malebranche considered, on the other hand, that body and soul are completely independent entities, and that if a connection exists between the two, it is because there is a divine entity involved that makes it possible. So, God is the cause of everything that happens in “reality”. Causes are occasions for God, God is the only cause, and through this is how human beings know the world.
In other words, for Malebranche, the only true cause of everything that exists is God, therefore, everything we perceive as an “effect of something” is nothing more than a moment or opportunity for God to cause or to achieve that something.
