Every Christian who decides on a stance to take on the mind-body issue is going to have to live with the fact that there will be certain “problem texts” in the Bible that appear to conflict with the position they take. As a physicalist, I think there is a very small number of such texts for my view, and I think there are plausible explanations for all of them (for example Jesus’ words to the criminal on the cross Luke 23:43, which I discussed recently). What one hopes to do is to settle on a view that has fewer problems than all others, problems that have an explanation in sight.

I think that traditional Cartesian/platonic dualism has a real problem, therefore, when it comes to 1 Corinthians 15, as I think it contains a problem for dualism – a problem with no real solution that I can see. The chapter is a decent size, so I won’t reproduce it here, but go ahead and read it first to make sure I’m representing what it says faithfully. The subject is the resurrection of the dead, and it arises because some of those in the church in Corinth had said that there will be no resurrection. The Apostle Paul makes a number of comments on this, one of which concerns my point here. In doing so he indicates that he cannot possibly have been a dualist.
Read the rest of the entry »

Alexander Pruss recently presented this “fun argument for dualism” at his blog:

(Premise) Our embodiment is universally seen as funny.

(Premise, justified inductively by 1) Our embodiment is objectively funny.

(Premise) The essence of the funny is incongruity.

(Premise) If materialism is true, there is no incongruity in our embodiment.

(Premise) If materialism is false, then dualism is true.

There is incongruity in our embodiment. (2 and 3)

Materialism is false. (4 and 6)

Dualism is true. (5 and 7)

My reply: Don’t ever do that again, or anything like it.

At last, the series ends. Here is part five of the series on the mind/body problem. This episode steps completely away from analytical philosophy and is an overview of some of the biblical material that bears on the subject. Although it’s a comparatively long episode (just under fifty minutes), it’s still a very sketchy overview. The subject is a large one, and at best I can get the ball rolling and encourage you to look further. Enjoy.

Episode 033: In Search of the Soul, Part 5 [ 49:58 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Here’s the fourth installment on my series on the mind-body problem.

In this episode I look at the argument against physicalism from the afterlife. Here, some dualists argue that if physicalism were true, then the resurrection of the dead would be logically impossible. Their argument is:

1. The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead entails that people will be raised back to life who are the same people who died long ago. In other words, they will have the same identity.
2. Sameness of identity requires unbroken metaphysical continuity (that is, the continued, uninterrupted or “non-gappy” existence of whatever thing the functioning person is, whether a physical thing or an immaterial mind).
3. In physicalism, it is logically impossible for there to be unbroken metaphysical continuity between a physical person who died a hundred years ago and a person who will be raised to life in the future.
4. Therefore if physicalism is true, the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is logically impossible. Stated differently, a physicalist cannot consistently believe in the resurrection of the dead.

How might a physicalist respond to this line of argument? Listen to find out. As promised in the episode, here are a few pieces of work by Trenton Merricks that relate to some of the material I cover:

“How to Live Forever Without Saving your Soul,” in Kevin Corcoran (ed.) Soul, Body, and Survival: Essays on the Metaphysics of Human Persons (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001), 183-200

“There Are No Criteria of Identity Over Time,” Noûs 32:1 (1998), 106-124.

“The Resurrection of the Body and the Life Everlasting” in Michael J. Murray (ed.), Reason for the Hope Within (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 261-286.

Enjoy.

Episode 032: In Search of the Soul, Part 4 [ 48:03 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Glenn Peoples

The podcast is back. Here’s part three of the series on philosophy of mind. We’ve moved from dualism in part one through to physicalism in this episode. I look at epiphenomenialism, reductionism, nonreductive physicalism and a constitution view.

As promised, here’s some suggested reading for those who want to look into the subject futher:

Nancey Murphy, “Nonreductive Physicalism and Free Will” http://www.metanexus.net/magazine/tabid/68/id/10501/Default.aspx

Nancey Murphy, “Is “Nonreductive Physicalism” an Oxymoron?” http://www.metanexus.net/magazine/tabid/68/id/10865/Default.aspx

Nancey Murphy and Warren Brown, Did My Neurons Make Me Do It?: Philosophical and Neurobiological Reflections on Moral Responsibility and Free Will (Oxford University Press, 2009).

Joel B. Green and Stuart L. Palmer (eds), In Search of the Soul: Four Views of the Mind-Body Problem (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2005). This volume includes contributions from Stewart Goetz (Substance Dualism), William Hasker (Emergent Dualism), Nancey Murphy (Nonreductive Physicalism) and Kevin Corcoran (Constitution View).

Joel B. Green (ed.), What About the Soul?: Neuroscience and Christian Anthropology (Abingdon Press, 2001). This volume includes contributions from Bill T. Arnold, D. Gareth  Jones, Joel B. Green, Patrick D. Miller, Charles E. Gutenson, Stuart L. Palmer, William Hasker, Michael Rynkiewich, Virginia T. Holeman, Lawson G. Stone and Malcolm Jeeves.

Warren S. Brown, Nancey Murphy and H. Newton Maloney (eds), Whatever Happened to the Soul: Scientific and Theological Portraits of Human Nature (Augsburg Fortress, 1998). This volume includes contributions from Nancey Murphy, H. Newton Malony, Ray S. Anderson, V. Elving Anderson, Francisco J. Ayala, Warren S. Brown Jr., Joel B. Green, Malcolm Jeeves, H. Newton Malony and Stephen G. Post.

Kevin Corcoran, Rethinking Human Nature: A Christian Materialist Alternative to the Soul (Baker Academic, 2006).

The website of Timothy O’Connor, featuring a number of articles.

Happy reading, and I hope you find this episode interesting!

Glenn Peoples

Episode 031: In Search of the Soul Part 3 [ 54:14 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

As I’m in the middle of a podcast series on the nature of the mind or soul and its relation to the body or brain (or both), my interests in general have been hovering around the issue, so here’s a blog post to add to the mix.

Alvin Plantinga is one of my favourite philosophers, but when he gets it wrong, he gets it surprisingly wrong. Probably the clearest example of this is his effort to resurrect that Titanic among theistic arguments, the Ontological Argument (Titanic only in the sense of its unenviable fate, not its size). He really shouldn’t have attempted that one. But in general I think his work is the kind of thing that many aspiring Christian scholars (myself included) aspire to produce. One particular skill that he has is to paint helpful (and sometimes highly amusing) illustrations of the point that he is getting at. But every now and then I find myself thinking “what?” I’ve concluded that like many great scholars, Plantinga is brilliant in general, but he has the odd soft spot in the head, noticeable by their contrast with the rest of his head. The ontological argument is one soft spot. Another is an argument that he uses for Cartesian dualism.

Read the rest of the entry »

Here it is (at last!), part two of the series on philosophy of mind, In Search of the Soul. In this episode I introduce the viewpoint called emergentism, and I explore the argument for dualism from free will.

It’s not the most exciting of episodes, but it’s worth including and listening to if you’re wanting to get a decent overview of philosophy of mind because it lays out a major position (emergentism) and examines a pretty common argument for dualism. In episode 28 (I’ve decided that the whole series will be no more than five episodes long), I’ll look at William Hasker’s (among other people) objection to physicalism from the possibility of an afterlife, which I think will be a lot more interesting.

Glenn Peoples

Episode 027: In Search of the Soul part 2 [ 44:34 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

In this episode of the Say Hello to my Little Friend podcast I start a four part series on philosophy of mind. I know I recently said that it would be a three part series, but hey, even four parts isn’t really enough to give the subject the full treatment it deserves. In part one I start with the dualist end of the spectrum. Today it’s Cartesian/Platonic dualism, which I take to be the most popular variety.

After recording the episode I thought maybe I should have thrown this in, so I’ll add it here. It’s a rather witty wee argument offered by Kevin Corcoran in the book that this series gets its name from, In Search of the Soul: Four Views of the Mind-Body Problem. The argument appears in his reply to Cartesian dualist Stewart Goetz:

Stewart Goetz sometimes kisses his wife.

Stewart Goetz’s substantively simple soul never kisses anyone. (It has no lips!)

Therefore, Stewart Goetz is not a simple soul.

If you’re not yet familiar with what the term “simple” means in this context, listen to the episode, then come back and read Corcoran’s argument. Also in this episode I have my first ever “caller,” Joe Johnson from the “Watching Theology” podcast. You too can call into the show by emailing me an audio clip of your comments and questions. Send them to peoples dot glenn at gmail dot com.

Enjoy!

Glenn Peoples

Episode 026: Whatever happened to the Soul? Part 1 [ 41:11 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Hey all. I’m putting together the next podcast series, which at this stage will consist of three episodes. The theme will be philosophy of mind, and it’s going to go something like this: Episode one will be the introduction and overview of the subject as a subject in philosophy. I’ll look at the major categories of philosophy of mind on a continuum of strong dualism (for example, the received understanding of Descartes’ view), to what I would call weaker versions of dualism (most importantly, the Thomistic view) to views that I regard as somewhere in between the two poles (like emergent dualism or property dualism), to more “materialistic” views like nonreductive dualism, all the way through to hardcore epiphenominalism and eliminative materialism (yes, it’s going to be one of those episodes).

In episode 2 in the series I’ll be looking at some of the implications of these views that are of interest to me as a Christian with interests in philosophy. What (if anything) do the various views imply about important issues like free will and responsibility or the possibility of life after death? (Here I’ll draw a little on my paper that interacts with William Hasker’s emergent dualism, but it won’t all be about that view.)

In episode 3 in the series, while remaining with the subject of philosophical anthropology (the question of what a person is/is made of), I’ll be turning to biblical and theological considerations. What – if anything – does Scripture have to say directly about this subject. What are the implications of this subject for Christian doctrines or understandings of the Christian life? What role have diverging beliefs in this area played in the history of Christian theology?

It’s a subject that has interested me for some time (especially from a theological point of view), and I’m looking forward to getting into the philosophical side of things, some of which is new territory for me as well.

On another note, with my new microphone the sound quality is a lot better, but if I only offer low quality audio files I may as well still be using a cheap microphone! So I’ll be making the mp3 files for future episodes higher quality than I have been. I’ll start using a 96k bitrate, which is still fairly low for an mp3 file.

For people many years into their academic careers this might seem like nothing to speak of, but with a relatively short list of publications and being only recently graduated, this is big news for me. Another paper of mine, this time my piece on William Hasker’s emergent dualism and life after death (see the article at this page), has been accepted for publication in one of the best journals of philosophy of religion out there, Philosophia Christi.