There has in recent years been a significant surge of interest in non-materialist accounts of the mind. Property dualists hold that all substances (concrete particulars that persist over time) are material, but mental properties are distinct from physical properties. Substance dualists maintain that the mind or person is a non-material substance. This article considers the prospects for substance dualism given the current state of the debate. The best known type of substance dualism, Cartesian dualism, has traditionally faced a number of (...) objections, but many contemporary philosophers have sought to avoid these by formulating novel versions of the view. I identify three central claims held in common by all forms of substance dualism, consider recent arguments for these claims, and assess how successfully different types of substance dualism respond to the traditional objections. I argue that most contemporary forms of the view still face one or more of three major challenges, from bundle theories of the self, from the recently developed “phenomenal concepts strategy”, and from worries about explanatory simplicity. (shrink)

In this paper we examine and critique the constitution view of the metaphysics of resurrection developed and defended by Lynne Rudder Baker. Baker identifies three conditions for an adequate metaphysics of resurrection. We argue that one of these, the identity condition, cannot be met on the constitution view given the account of personal identity it assumes. We discuss some problems with the constitution theory of personal identity Baker develops in her book, Persons and Bodies. We argue that these problems render (...) the constitution theory of personal identity as stated by Baker untenable. The upshot for the debate over the metaphysics of resurrection is that the constitution view of the metaphysics of resurrection must either be rejected or modified. (shrink)

Alguns filósofos materialistas pensam, contra o dualismo de substância, que uma mente incorporada é apenas uma mente que depende de um corpo para existir, isto é, que a mente náo existe independentemente de um corpo. Tomarei como representativas deste ponto de vista muito limitado sobre incorporaçáo as idéias de Lynne Baker e sua Teoria da Constituiçáo de Propriedades. Baker diz que prefere enfrentar o problema da relaçáo pessoa e corpo em vez da relaçáo mente e corpo porque esta última formulaçáo (...) implica a idéia de uma mente distinta e separada do corpo enquanto que a primeira está mais de acordo com sua concepçáo de uma mente incorporada e situada. O problema é que Baker esquece isso quando define pessoa em termos de perspectiva de primeira pessoa ou autoconsciência. Embora Baker diga que a autoconsciência depende de condições estruturais – um corpo – e ambientais – a situaçáo -, o que torna a pessoa humana autoconsciente uma entidade ontologicamente distinta do corpo que a constitui e de outros animais sáo suas realizações tais como arte, filosofia, ciência, moral, etc. Parece que, para Baker, a autoconsciência é náo apenas uma condiçáo necessária mas também uma condiçáo suficiente para aquelas realizações humanas, enquanto que o corpo desempenha apenas um papel indireto. Contra tais idéias nós podemos perguntar: as grandes realizações que distinguem pessoas humanas de outros animais seriam possíveis independentemente da constituiçáo biológica de nosso corpo e de suas necessidades? (shrink)

The relationship of minds, bodies, and persons has been a central topic of debate in Western philosophy and theology. This article reviews the ongoing debates about the relationship and nature of bodies, minds, and persons among contemporary Christian analytic philosophers and theologians. The first two parts present some general theological constraints for philosophical theories of persons and describe the basic concepts used (substance, property, supervenience, and physicalism). The views themselves fall into three broad categories. Dualists think that persons are either (...) identical with or partly constituted by non-physical souls. On this view, there are immaterial substances and properties. Hylomorphists maintain that persons are composites of bodies and the souls that inform them. Finally, physicalists claim that there are no immaterial parts to persons. Instead, persons are composed of bodies and brains, the mental properties they have supervene on physical properties. (shrink)

The relationship of minds, bodies, and persons has been a central topic of debate in Western philosophy and theology. This article reviews the ongoing debates about the relationship and nature of bodies, minds, and persons among contemporary Christian analytic philosophers and theologians. The first two parts present some general theological constraints for philosophical theories of persons and describe the basic concepts used (substance, property, supervenience, and physicalism). The views themselves fall into three broad categories. Dualists think that persons are either (...) identical with or partly constituted by non-physical souls. On this view, there are immaterial substances and properties. Hylomorphists maintain that persons are composites of bodies and the souls that inform them. Finally, physicalists claim that there are no immaterial parts to persons. Instead, persons are composed of bodies and brains; the mental properties they have supervene on physical properties. (shrink)