How the mind relate to the body

Section 1
According to Descartes, how does the mind relate to the body? Why does Princess Elisabeth find Descartes' views objectionable? Who do you think offers the more compelling view and why?
Descartes thinks that mind is something totally distinguished from body. The essence of mind is thought, and the essence of body is extension. Mind is indivisible, and body is divisible. But mind can causally interact with the body, and the causal interaction occurs in pineal body. On the one hand, the mind can causally influence the body. For example, if you want to stand up, the thought that you want to stand up will stimulate something in your brain, and then you brain gives order to your body to stand up. On the other hand, the body can also influence some aspects of mind. For example, lets say you walk into a dark room, your body will feel for the light switch witch will then turn on all of the lights, you now can see all of the beautiful objects in the room. You can finally see all of the objects and have a clear view of all of the objects. This is how body can influence the mind. The mind and body are two separate entities but can interact and work with each other. The essence of mind is thought, and the essence of body is extension
Princess Elisabeth believes that Descartes is wrong because Descartes thinks that the mind and body are different. Princess Elisabeth believes that the mind itself is material, what this means is that the mind is also a body. She believes that the mind is materialistic because, her view is that only material objects can move material objects. On the other hand Descartes believes that the mind is immaterial.
I think Princess Elisabeth gives the more compelling view because it just makes more sense. Our minds are its own body, they are material objects that can move other material objects. Our thoughts can definitely be immaterial. Our mind is a material objects that sends material signals to other parts of our body to move, be active, etc. It is hard to think that an immaterial object can have such and influence over us. Science has found that a lot of our thoughts have some neural basis. Many of our thoughts are in fact some nervous impulse.
Section 2
What is philosophical behaviorism? How is it different from psychological behaviorism? Do you think that philosophical behaviorism is a plausible theory of the mind? Why or why not?
Philosophical behaviorism is the view that talk of mental states can be translated to talk of behavioral states without loss of meaning. What this means is that we can talk about our mind and reduce that talk to talk about our behaviors without any loss. For example from the lecture: "To say, “Jane is in pain” means the same as saying, “Jane is inclined to wince, say “ouch!” and take aspirin.
Psychological behaviorism is a theory about psychological methodology. Psychological methodology does not think that all talk of mental states should be understood as talk of behavioral states. We do not know what happens in one's brain, so the best way to find out what is going on is to observe someone's behavior to find out about their mental state.
I do not think philosophical behaviorism is a plausible theory of mind. There could be some times where the behavioral state does not match with the mental states. For instance Jane could be smiling, but inside Jane is not happy. Not all behavioral states will match with the mental states.