Substance Dualism

 

Res Extensa

Bodies: ours, the world, doorknobs

Characteristics: finite, acted upon, extended, mechanical, determined

 

Res Cogitans

Two types: Minds and God

Characteristics : infinite, active, not-extended, thinking, free

 

Pro-Substance Dualism:

1.      If substance dualism is false, then my mind cannot exist independently of my body

2.      My mind can exist independently of my body

3.      \Substance dualism is true

 

Experiential data #1:

Near-death experience & Dream-time

1.      Some people report that they have had out-of-body experiences

2.      The best explanation for these reports is that minds can exist with bodies

3.      \Minds probably can exist independently of bodies

4.      \Substance dualism probably is true

 

Leibniz’s Law: A = B if and only if they hold all properties in common

 

Experiential data #2a:

Conceivability Argument

1.      I can conceive that I exist without a body

2.      I cannot conceive that I exist without a mind

3.      \My mind is more intimately connected with me than my body

4.      \My mind has a property that my body lacks

5.      \My mind is not identical to my body

6.      \Substance dualism is true

 

Intentionality: the property of being “about” something

 

Experiential data #2b:

Intentionality Argument

1.      Physical states do not have intentionality

2.      Mental states do have intentionality

3.      \ Mental states have a property that physical states lack

4.      \ Mental states are not identical to physical states

5.      \ Substance dualism is true

 

Anti-Substance Dualism:

 

The Interaction problem (Explaining “The Ghost in the Machine”)

1.      Assume that substance dualism is correct

2.      Mind and body interact with one another

3.      Mind is a non-extended, immaterial substance

4.      Body is an extended, physical substance

5.      Non-extended, immaterial substances cannot interact with  extended, physical substance

6.      \Mind and body cannot interact with one another

7.      \Substance dualism is not correct.

 

Is this all a Category Mistake?

Putting a term in the wrong logical category;  Descartes tries to apply a mechanistic model to non-mechanistic activity

 

1.      Where’s the university?

2.      A right glove, a left glove & the pair of gloves are not three things

3.      He can’t see the forest for the trees

4.      She came in a taxi and left in a huff