Property Dualism Argument

Words: 792
Pages: 4

In this paper, I will argue that property dualism is not a good argument against physicalism by showing that the knowledge argument and the modal argument are not good very good arguments. Qualia are subjective experiences (pg. 3). Physicalism is the view that every property is physical, and it can be explained by science (pg. 29). Property dualism refers to the philosophical view that the mind is one single substance, but contains two properties; the physical brain and the nonphysical qualia (pg. 29). These properties are not related to each other (pg. 29). I am going to start off by explaining, and then critiquing, a thought experiment that was originally created by Frank Jackson, for the knowledge argument in favour of property dualism. Imagine the possibility of Mary existing, whom is a brilliant futuristic neuroscientist who knows everything about the physical properties in the brain involved with colour vision (pg. 34). However, Mary has never directly experienced colour (pg.34). The knowledge argument uses this thought experiment to argue that physicalism can only be true if Mary knows everything about colour vision. However, because Mary has never directly experienced colour vision, Mary does not know everything about colour vision. Therefore, physicalism cannot …show more content…
If the knowledge argument for property dualism is not sound and thus untrue, because it rejects the possibility of future scientific explanations, then perhaps property dualism can be true because it is conceivable. The modal argument argues that because it is conceivable that a being with all of my physical properties but lacks my qualia to exist, and since what is conceivable is possible, and because a being that has all of my physical properties but does not have qualia is possible, then qualia must not be physical properties. It is clearly true that what is conceivable is