[Wittrs] Re: Is "Dualism" a Pejorative Term?

  • From: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 23:42:57 -0000

--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "SWM" <SWMirsky@...> wrote:


> To note these is to point out the various dualist positions that are
> possible but not to argue for the truth or primacy of any of them.

Suppose you use similar reasoning, but instead of applying it  to
consciousness you apply it to mathematics or art or poetry.  How would
that work out?


>> And what does it mean to say that dualism is true? Or, to ask
>> differently, what kind of criteria would be used to settle the
>> question of whether dualism is true?


> 1) If we could not explain the occurrence of consciousness in a
> physicalist way, then some other thesis would be required, probably
> a dualist (but maybe a multiplist) one.

Wouldn't that only show that we were using an inadequate explanatory
framework?


> 2) If we had evidence of ghosts and spirits and other realms of
> existence (of minds existing without bodies, of life after death,
> etc.) that went beyond subjective feelings and claims based on them,
> then I would say we needed to consider a dualist explanation of
> the phenomena of existence.

Wouldn't we just change what we mean by "physical" so that it
incorporated ghosts and spirits as physical?

Regards,
Neil

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

Other related posts: