[Wittrs] Re: Dualism Cooties: Postulates of EPD (Essential Property Dualism)

  • From: Gordon Swobe <gts_2000@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 17:59:07 -0700 (PDT)

--- On Mon, 3/22/10, Joseph Polanik <wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Property dualism as I use the term involves NON-physical properties of 
>> matter that cause experienceable phenomena.
> two questions:
> how do you get around the argument that all the properties
> of physical objects are physical properties?

I don't. I consider myself a materialist/physicalist, not a property

I simply wanted to comment on your seemingly incorrect statement that 
property dualism has to do with physical properties of physical objects 
causing subjective experience. Perhaps you mean something different by 
"essential" property dualism, but when I use the term property dualism I 
refer to the view that matter has both physical and non-physical 
properties, the latter of which property dualists posit to explain mental 

Property dualism seems a bit more palatable than substance dualism, but to 
my way of thinking it still suffers from some of the same weaknesses. How, 
for example, can these supposed non-physical properties of matter affect 
the material world? 

> are you denying that Essential Property Dualism counts as a
> real (as in genuine) property dualism; and, if so, how would you
> classify EPD?

Again I wonder if you mean by EPD something other than what I mean by 
ordinary property dualism or PD. As you described EPD, physical properties 
of matter cause both measurable and experienceable phenomena. To me that 
sounds like ordinary materialism.



Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

Other related posts: