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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jonathan Colvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "'Hal Finney'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <everything-list@eskimo.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
