Undefeated dualism
نویسنده
چکیده
In the standard thought experiments, dualism strikes many philosophers as true, including many non-dualists. This ‘striking’ generates prima facie justification: in the absence of defeaters, we ought to believe that things are as they seem to be, i.e. we ought to be dualists. In this paper, I examine several proposed undercutting defeaters for our dualist intuitions. I argue that each proposal fails, since each rests on a false assumption, or requires empirical evidence that it lacks, or overgenerates defeaters. By the end, our prima facie justification for dualism remains undefeated. I close with one objection concerning the dialectical role of rebutting defeaters, and I argue that the prospects for a successful rebutting defeater for our dualist intuitions are dim. Since dualism emerges undefeated, we ought to believe it.
منابع مشابه
Decision Making Under Information Asymmetry: Experimental Evidence on Belief Refinements
We explore how individuals make decisions in an operations management setting when there is information asymmetry between the firm and an outside investor. A common assumption in the signaling game literature is that beliefs among the participants in the game are refined using the Intuitive Criterion refinement. Our experimental results provide evidence that the predictive power of this refinem...
متن کاملResearch notes on computational issues in defeasible reasoning
Argument-based nonmonotonic reasoning relies on a principle, known as defeat among arguments. The idea is that a logical statement holds if (and only if) that statement is supported by an argument that remains undefeated in competition with other arguments. In this paper we show that finding out whether an argument remains undefeated is NP-complete. We then suggest tractable algorithms that app...
متن کاملCan Teleosemantics Deflect the EAAN?
Alvin Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism aims to show that the conjunction of contemporary evolutionary theory (E) with the claim that there is no God (N) cannot be rationally accepted. Where R is the claim that our cognitive faculties are reliable, the argument is: P1. The probability of R given N and E is low or inscrutable. P2. Anyone who sees (1) and accepts (N&E) has a de...
متن کاملCan teleosemantics deflect the EAAN?
Alvin Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism aims to show that the conjunction of contemporary evolutionary theory (E) with the claim that there is no God (N) cannot be rationally accepted. Where R is the claim that our cognitive faculties are reliable, the argument is: P1. The probability of R given N and E is low or inscrutable. P2. Anyone who sees (1) and accepts (N&E) has a de...
متن کاملProperty Dualism and the Merits of Solutions to the Mind-Body Problem
Property dualism and the merits of solutions to the mind-body problem: a reply to Strawson. Property Dualism and the Merits of Solutions to the Mind-Body Problem A Reply to Strawson
متن کامل