How have Dualists tried to explain the apparent two-way causal interaction between mind and body? Which version of dualism ? Cartesian Dualism, Parallelism or Epiphenomenalism ? is the most plausible theory of mind?
The distinction between our body, our minds and how they interact has long been a question discussed between philosophers of the mind. In this essay I shall begin by setting out the differences in beliefs about the location and form that the mind takes, focusing on the ways in which dualists define the mind and the body. Then I will explain the ways in which substance dualists, those who argue that there is a dualism of substances of the mind and body, have attempted to explain the apparent interaction between the mind and body, whilst setting up objects to the theories. I will conclude that Cartesian dualism is the most plausible theory of mind, as it is the most conceivable and argues the mind-body interaction that seems to exist, actually does.
I will define a mind by defining those things that have minds as contain a mind are capable of self-directed motion and which have mental states - cognitive, conative and affective states- such as beliefs and desires and sensations. Therefore something that has these qualities has a mind in which mental states are contained. Dualists argue that the mind is not physical and does not have physical mental states, such as brain states, but rather that it is a non-physical entity, entirely separate from the body, and sharing no properties of physical matter such as mass or location. They also maintain "there is something about consciousness that eludes the explanatory apparatus of physical science " and therefore needs further explanation.
There are many different reasons dualists believe the mind a ...