[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
dualist.
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
phenomena.
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.
-gts
==========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
