Re: Dualism and the DA

From: Stephen Paul King <stephenk1.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 22:56:21 -0400

Dear Jonathan,

    Pardon the intrusion, but in your opinion does every form of dualism
require that one side of the duality has properties and behaviors that are
not constrained by the other side of the duality, as examplified by the idea
of "randomly emplaced souls"?
    The idea that all dualities, of say mind and body, allow that minds and
bodies can have properties and behaviours that are not mutually constrained
is, at best, an incoherent straw dog.

Kindest regards,

Stephen

----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell Standish" <r.standish.domain.name.hidden>
To: "Jonathan Colvin" <jcolvin.domain.name.hidden>
Cc: "'Hal Finney'" <hal.domain.name.hidden>; <everything-list.domain.name.hidden.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 9:28 PM
Subject: Dualism and the DA


> On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 06:05:16PM -0700, Jonathan Colvin wrote:
>>
>> Since it is coming from Nick B., over-exhaustive :)
>> I don't think anybody, Nick included, has yet come up with a convincing
>> way
>> to define appropriate reference classes. Absent this, the only way to
>> rescue
>> the DA seems to be a sort of dualism (randomly emplaced souls etc).
>>
>
> Nooo! - the DA does not imply dualism. The souls do not need to exist
> anywhere else before being randomly emplaced.
>
> Cheers
Received on Wed Jun 15 2005 - 22:57:23 PDT