Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Mind-body dualism faces the interaction problem: if mind is non-physical, it cannot causally interact with the physical body (Princess Elisabeth, Ryle).
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
The problem assumes causation requires physical contact or energy transfer; mental causation might operate via non-standard causal modes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Consciousness supervenes on neural states without being reducible to them; this allows mental causation without dualism's interaction problem.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The interaction problem equally challenges physicalism about properties (quale-to-behavior) and may reflect confused assumptions about causation itself.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Physical causation requires energy transfer; non-physical minds cannot transfer energy without violating conservation laws.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If mind causally affects body, mental events must have physical effects; but physical effects have sufficient physical causes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Spatial location is required for causal interaction; non-physical minds lack spatial coordinates for interaction mechanisms.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.