My argument against Cartesian dualism is formally valid. The conclusion is derived from premises. — quine
He doesn't. But quine explicitly said in the opening post "I am going to offer an argument against Cartesian dualism". — Michael
It's because they are located in entirely different areas. Bodies are located in space and time. Minds are not there. — quine
It's because they are located in entirely different areas. — quine
Mind-body identity theory is a better choice than dualism is. According to identity theory, mind and body occupy the same space-time point. In this view, the problem of mind-body interaction is automatically solved. They are both located in space and time. — quine
(1) If dualism is true, then mind is not spatio-temporal, and body is spatio-temporal.
(2) If mind is not spatio-temporal, and body is spatio-temporal, then mind and body cannot interact.
(3) Mind and body can interact.
Therefore, (4) dualism is not true. — quine
For the dualist, the physicalist has physical matter somehow produce the mind and consciousness, the mechanics of which has not been illustrated. For the physicalist, the dualist has two different substances on different modes of existence interact, the mechanics of which have not been illustrated. — Chany
(1) If dualism is true, then mind is not spatio-temporal, and body is spatio-temporal.
(2) If mind is not spatio-temporal, and body is spatio-temporal, then mind and body cannot interact.
(3) Mind and body can interact.
Therefore, (4) dualism is not true. — quine
the notion of how physical matter, in some forms, produces consciousness and minds while it does not in other forms. — Chany
every physical effect (i.e. caused event) has physical sufficient causes † — Agustin Vincente
As the old saying goes, you can’t misplace your body, but you can lose your mind. :) — jorndoe
I decide consciously to raise my arm, and the damn thing goes up. (Laughter) Furthermore, notice this: We do not say, "Well, it's a bit like the weather in Geneva. Some days it goes up and some days it doesn't go up." No. It goes up whenever I damn well want it to. — Searle
If the mind is not physical then why should it have causal influence upon the physical? — m-theory
If it does have causal influence upon the physical then how is the mind not also physical?
The physicalist will say that if the [mind?] is physically causal, then it is because it is physical.
Or rather that if the mind is physically causal it is not necessary to regard the mind as non-physical.
There's the problem for dualism — Banno
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.