Arguments Against Dualism

Discussion on Dualism Introduction Discussions on the true nature of man, the existence of free will and the validity of science are focused on two philosophical theories of dualism and materialism. In support of dualism, supporters believe that there are two types of substances, human beings, substances and non-material substances. Meanwhile, since materialism proposes that people and things are the same, there is no other non-material existence.

These arguments provide a good basis for philosophers to believe substantive dualism. But there are also serious objections. The first major discussion on dualism is simplicity. The material list says that it is more reasonable to subscribe to them because their opinions are simpler (they only believe in physical things). The materialistic view is easy to prove, as it is no doubt that there are material substances and substances that are not material are current hypotheses. This argument is very irrational to me. You should choose a philosophical point of view, as one person makes more sense to you. Because one person is not because your idea is small.

One argument against dualism is about causality. If consciousness (thought) can exist independently of physical reality (brain), we must explain how to create physical memory of consciousness. Therefore, dualism must explain how consciousness affects physical reality. One of the major objections to dual interactivity is the lack of explanation of how materials and non-materials interact. Various non-material thought factors of dualism influence substance bodies, and vice versa, especially in the 20th century are attacked strongly by various aspects. Dualist critics often ask how completely irrelevant things completely affect substances - this is a fundamental problem of causality

This paper shows Descartes' interactive material dualism, which we analyze and evaluate with this paper. This paper points out that this discussion on Descartes' interactive material dualism is unhealthy, although its second premise is wrong, it is inherently effective, but it is unhealthy. Despite the logical framework and deductive validity, we discussed this argument, but it is inevitably wrong due to the second premise. In this paper, by presenting the uniqueness of psychological and physical attributes and states, we propose some arguments and secondary qualities that support material duality. In this paper, we also consider the main criticism of interactive material dualism and the problem of physical and mental interaction. If this article is totally effective, the second premise that you can agree with Descartes' discussion as a reader is false.