An excellent concise and accurate statement of the interactive dualism theory of mind

Just so I understand:

- A Designer, or group of Designers, makes two substances out of Nothing? Or out of Its/Their own infinite Body/Bodies?

- The two substances are both extended into at least 3 dimensions, so that we have a physical extended world and a spiritual world extended?

- Any seeming interaction between the substances is actually a Parallelism, where a collection of conditional checks are acted out to ensure alcohol clouds the mind's judgement and a runner's will pushes past exhaustion?

- Said conditional check even holds for PK, even though different people exert different mental effort to manifest any PK at all, with some focusing to move some RNG generators and others able to perform much greater feats like levitation?

Some facts independent of possible philosophically speculative origins of our reality: The way our world obviously works in the now is where we must start with. In this world physical causation is a fact regardless of whatever its esoteric real ultimate nature may be. We deal with our world through our experiences and actions in a de facto physical environment. In this world the mental realm (or consciousness) evidently according to all evidence while in body is manifested via the brain. We can rule out the brain actually generating consciousness through several strong paranormal evidental and philosophical arguments against it and against materialism in general. And formulations like the Hard Problem of consciousness strongly indicate that mind and consciousness and subjective awareness, etc. are absolutely not physical.

This then leaves the only other option to explain our existence here and now - in life our consciousness or spirit must somehow inhabit the brain neurological structures and interact with them so as to result in the observed close correlation between brain physical neurological phenomena and mental phenomena. This observed close correlation is the main evidence materialist neurology uses to try to prove the brain is the generator of consciousness. But as mentioned above the brain neurological structures are absolutely certainly not the origin of our consciousness. 

Many NDE OBEs exist, verified through veridicality found by investigation. They are direct experiences of the NDEr temporarily leaving the physical body as some sort of mobile center of consciousness that must be immaterial since it can float through walls and ceilings. Typically it remains hovering above its body for a time, then moves into some other higher level of spiritual existence, only to eventually return into the body of course.

Now notice that observing and analyzing a little the actual human experience and situation in the physical world strongly indicates a situation where human spirits or souls are ultimately mobile centers of consciousness inhabiting and interacting with the brain while embodied, but can under some circumstances separate from the body and brain only to eventually return and be interviewed about their experiences. 

It should be noted that the paranormal phenomenon of verified reincarnation cases also fit into this analysis as another related area of human experience indicating interactive Dualism. 

We keep getting back to the fact that very much actual human observation and experience in the de facto physical world (whatever the "physical" may ultimately be according to various philosophies) is exactly as would be expected from the interactional Dualist model.

This then leaves the competing philosophies and models of mind such as the various brands of Idealism and Monism the task of also explaining the previously outlined facts. Good luck. Why should a reality where absolutely everything is mental or spiritual including the apparent material world choose to operate in such an false but elaborate way according to and mimicing a wrong model/philosophy of mind? This would seem to have to be an elaborate charade or deliberate illusion for some high purpose dictated by the "powers that be".

If this last observation turns out to be the truth, that interactive Dualism is just a local model by which most of the world behaves and which does not rule the wider realm of existence, then interactive Dualism is still extremely important to humans because it is how so much actual human experience unfolds in this physical world we all inhabit. As a practical matter we should know how our physical world of matter and human persons really work on a basic level.

And by the way, in response to a previous post, I don't think observations of whether or not orthodox academia and science are especially hostile to Dualism and give parapsychology a bad name in those quarters have any relevance to the question of whether it is true.

Some facts independent of possible philosophically speculative origins of our reality: The way our world obviously works in the now is where we must start with. In this world physical causation is a fact regardless of whatever its esoteric real ultimate nature may be. We deal with our world through our experiences and actions in a de facto physical environment. In this world the mental realm (or consciousness) evidently according to all evidence while in body is manifested via the brain. We can rule out the brain actually generating consciousness through several strong paranormal evidental and philosophical arguments against it and against materialism in general. And formulations like the Hard Problem of consciousness strongly indicate that mind and consciousness and subjective awareness, etc. are absolutely not physical.

It seems odd to rule out Physicalism by way of philosophical argument but then leave the idea of physical causation intact, given physical causation can also be challenged by philosophy.

It is difficult to see what the "physical" is, since as you note we deal with the world through the mediation of our experience. In fact physics itself doesn't tell us about the intrinsic essence of whatever the "physical" is supposed to be:

"We don't know what a rock really is, or an atom, or an electron. We can only observe how they interact with other things and thereby describe their relational properties.

Perhaps everything has external and internal aspects. The external properties are those that science can capture and describe - through interactions, in terms of relationships. The internal aspect is the intrinsic essence, it is the reality that is not expressible in the language of interactions and relations."
 -Lee Smolin

This then leaves the only other option to explain our existence here and now - in life our consciousness or spirit must somehow inhabit the brain neurological structures and interact with them so as to result in the observed close correlation between brain physical neurological phenomena and mental phenomena. This observed close correlation is the main evidence materialist neurology uses to try to prove the brain is the generator of consciousness. But as mentioned above the brain neurological structures are absolutely certainly not the origin of our consciousness. 
Many NDE OBEs exist, verified through veridicality found by investigation. They are direct experiences of the NDEr temporarily leaving the physical body as some sort of mobile center of consciousness that must be immaterial since it can float through walls and ceilings. Typically it remains hovering above its body for a time, then moves into some other higher level of spiritual existence, only to eventually return into the body of course.

Well we know brains have some important relationship to mentality, I don't know if we can say spirit inhabits a brain.

I agree that there is presence that is not physical, and this is shown by varied OOBEs of which NDErs are a part. However even here we seem to sometimes have people embodied in what we might call "subtle bodies", though at other times it seems a person's consciousness is more expansive and arguably lacking embodiment.

Not sure floating through walls and ceilings makes something "immaterial". It can just be of a different kind of "matter", like the subtle matter of certain Buddhist traditions. What is immaterial in a strong sense are the qualities of the mental - Subjectivity, Reason, Aboutness of Thought.

Subtle bodies can be seen as apparitions, and said apparitions have in some cases had interaction with the "physical" world. So it seems the "physical" is not wholly distinct from the stuff apparitions are made of.

Now notice that observing and analyzing a little the actual human experience and situation in the physical world strongly indicates a situation where human spirits or souls are ultimately mobile centers of consciousness inhabiting and interacting with the brain while embodied, but can under some circumstances separate from the body and brain only to eventually return and be interviewed about their experiences. 
It should be noted that the paranormal phenomenon of verified reincarnation cases also fit into this analysis as another related area of human experience indicating interactive Dualism. 
We keep getting back to the fact that very much actual human observation and experience in the de facto physical world (whatever the "physical" may ultimately be according to various philosophies) is exactly as would be expected from the interactional Dualist model.

Sure, there's always going to be Functional Dualism between the Experiencer and Experienced.

The question is whether it makes sense for the Experienced to be classified as mental (like it is in our dreams) or something else. If it's something else then there are a few options on what the "physical" is.

This then leaves the competing philosophies and models of mind such as the various brands of Idealism and Monism the task of also explaining the previously outlined facts. Good luck. Why should a reality where absolutely everything is mental or spiritual including the apparent material world choose to operate in such an false but elaborate way according to and mimicing a wrong model/philosophy of mind? This would seem to have to be an elaborate charade or deliberate illusion for some high purpose dictated by the "powers that be".

Even if there is something that is "physical", it need not be a distinct substance. It's not that the world is illusory, it's simply the "stuff" out of which is made changes under Idealism or Neutral Monism.

The problem with this existence is not the "stuff" it was made from, but why it seems constructed to push people to believe there is no Survival and no Psi. Why are paranormal events not more prevalent? Why is it so difficult for some to manifest even the smallest Psi, whereas others are confronted by poltergeists or other bizarre events?

If this last observation turns out to be the truth, that interactive Dualism is just a local model by which most of the world behaves and which does not rule the wider realm of existence, then interactive Dualism is still extremely important to humans because it is how so much actual human experience unfolds in this physical world we all inhabit. As a practical matter we should know how our physical world of matter and human persons really work on a basic level.

Well the Experiencer should try to know something about what is being Experienced. I'm not sure Dualism as a metaphysical position is necessary. Idealist physicists still study the same stuff as Materialist physicists after all.

And by the way, in response to a previous post, I don't think observations of whether or not orthodox academia and science are especially hostile to Dualism and give parapsychology a bad name in those quarters have any relevance to the question of whether it is true.

Well we don't know if it's true, so insisting on taking it as a default when it's seen by many as a dead position unworthy of consideration is a bad move strategically.

Most people think two distinct substances cannot interact. Now I am not convinced by this, because we have great difficulty in explaining how stuff of a single substance interacts. Yet even trying to figure out what it means to have substances seems to involve interaction to some degree so hard to see how this helps Dualism much...

Of course even if Dualism is false it doesn't make Idealism or any other Monism true. But it is hard to get around the idea that *some* kind of Monism lies beneath any Functional Dualism.

It seems odd to rule out Physicalism by way of philosophical argument but then leave the idea of physical causation intact, given physical causation can also be challenged by philosophy.

It is difficult to see what the "physical" is, since as you note we deal with the world through the mediation of our experience. In fact physics itself doesn't tell us about the intrinsic essence of whatever the "physical" is supposed to be:

"We don't know what a rock really is, or an atom, or an electron. We can only observe how they interact with other things and thereby describe their relational properties.

Perhaps everything has external and internal aspects. The external properties are those that science can capture and describe - through interactions, in terms of relationships. The internal aspect is the intrinsic essence, it is the reality that is not expressible in the language of interactions and relations."
 -Lee Smolin


Well we know brains have some important relationship to mentality, I don't know if we can say spirit inhabits a brain.

I agree that there is presence that is not physical, and this is shown by varied OOBEs of which NDErs are a part. However even here we seem to sometimes have people embodied in what we might call "subtle bodies", though at other times it seems a person's consciousness is more expansive and arguably lacking embodiment.

Not sure floating through walls and ceilings makes something "immaterial". It can just be of a different kind of "matter", like the subtle matter of certain Buddhist traditions. What is immaterial in a strong sense are the qualities of the mental - Subjectivity, Reason, Aboutness of Thought.

Subtle bodies can be seen as apparitions, and said apparitions have in some cases had interaction with the "physical" world. So it seems the "physical" is not wholly distinct from the stuff apparitions are made of.


Sure, there's always going to be Functional Dualism between the Experiencer and Experienced.

The question is whether it makes sense for the Experienced to be classified as mental (like it is in our dreams) or something else. If it's something else then there are a few options on what the "physical" is.


Even if there is something that is "physical", it need not be a distinct substance. It's not that the world is illusory, it's simply the "stuff" out of which is made changes under Idealism or Neutral Monism.

The problem with this existence is not the "stuff" it was made from, but why it seems constructed to push people to believe there is no Survival and no Psi. Why are paranormal events not more prevalent? Why is it so difficult for some to manifest even the smallest Psi, whereas others are confronted by poltergeists or other bizarre events?


Well the Experiencer should try to know something about what is being Experienced. I'm not sure Dualism as a metaphysical position is necessary. Idealist physicists still study the same stuff as Materialist physicists after all.


Well we don't know if it's true, so insisting on taking it as a default when it's seen by many as a dead position unworthy of consideration is a bad move strategically.

Most people think two distinct substances cannot interact. Now I am not convinced by this, because we have great difficulty in explaining how stuff of a single substance interacts. Yet even trying to figure out what it means to have substances seems to involve interaction to some degree so hard to see how this helps Dualism much...

Of course even if Dualism is false it doesn't make Idealism or any other Monism true. But it is hard to get around the idea that *some* kind of Monism lies beneath any Functional Dualism.

A general response is that you don't seem to have responded and engaged with most of my actual points or statements in my post.

I might comment about your statement that "I don't know if we can say spirit inhabits a brain.", it seems obvious in everyday conscious experience that somehow in some very important sense our consciousness is centered in  the brain, as further evidenced by the instant effects on consciousness of brain injuries, drugs, etc. And NDE OBEs demonstrate NDErs somehow leaving their bodies and brains to float away as some form of mobile center of consciousness, which occurrence seems to imply that the spirit consciousness was in some sense previously occupying or inhabiting the brain.

At the end of your response, I agree that probably at the bottom of it the ultimate essence of things in our reality is according to some form of Monism. That doesn't change the fact that much or most of our experiences in the physical world behave exactly like interactional Dualism is a correct model for the structure and workings of at least our local physical reality.

The answer is that thing-substances (persons aka minds) like God cannot be subdivided into further thing-substances (persons aka minds) - only stuff-substances can be subdivided like that - and thus if there are to be other thing-substances like God (us other persons), then God has to create them. If they are then to be able to interact, the best means of God's providing for that interaction is to create stuff-substances in and through which they can do so.

I wonder if we know that is true.

People can survive after the removal of a whole brain hemisphere. Obviously, the half removed is normally diseased in some way, but that does open the question as to what happens if this procedure is done on a well person, and the other hemisphere is implanted into another skull.

OK if we assume that the mind is distinct from the brain, you end up with two minds where there was one.

David

A general response is that you don't seem to have responded and engaged with most of my actual points or statements in my post.

I might comment about your statement that "I don't know if we can say spirit inhabits a brain.", it seems obvious in everyday conscious experience that somehow in some very important sense our consciousness is centered in  the brain, as further evidenced by the instant effects on consciousness of brain injuries, drugs, etc. And NDE OBEs demonstrate NDErs somehow leaving their bodies and brains to float away as some form of mobile center of consciousness, which occurrence seems to imply that the spirit consciousness was in some sense previously occupying or inhabiting the brain.

At the end of your response, I agree that probably at the bottom of it the ultimate essence of things in our reality is according to some form of Monism. That doesn't change the fact that much or most of our experiences in the physical world behave exactly like interactional Dualism is a correct model for the structure and workings of at least our local physical reality.

What point do you think I missed?

I realize OBEs/NDEs have, at times, had people experience a rise out of their bodies. But it isn't clear to me this is universal.

But I agree this embodied experience is a Functional Dualism, but I am not sure there is ever a way around that because you will have an Experiencer and what they Experience.

Sorry for not replying sooner... it's a bit hard to mull it all over when you've had a nasty cold for a week that cripples you.

In summary... Interactive Dualism simply fails as a theory of mind. It's not even quite the interaction problem at this point, for me... first, Interactive Dualism needs to resolve the question of how matter can be its own base substance, how mind-as-we-know-it can be its own base substance, why there is any need for "God" to be a person that has any need, limitation or requirement to create entirely separate and distinct substances out of apparently nothing, but then arbitrarily allow to interact through some entirely unexplained... glue, mechanism or something else.

This actually gets much worse... with the spiritual entities I've now communicated long enough with to feel more and more comfortable with the explicit and independent existence of from my mind, I get around to thinking about the nature of spiritual form... astral form? Sigh, I'm struggling with a lack of descriptors here... spirits have forms... incarnations, and they are neither mind nor physical, so they stand outside of Interactive Dualism, implying a Parallelism if anything.

And yet it raises yet more questions for me ~ assuming an Interactive Parallelism for a moment... what allows my mind to so easily comprehend the feeling of the forms of these spiritual entities? It happens with clear and concise ease. There's no appearance of any glue or mechanism or interaction ~ it's just very direct and transparent.

I can only sort of compare it with my experience of physicality... physicality is known through senses... the spirits are known through senses... what are senses, and how do they relate to the phenomena being sensed? What are phenomena, anyways? What is form? Energy, vibration, essence?

I am reminded of this quote by Bill Hicks:

“Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather.”

The nature of matter implied here seems fully supported by quantum physics... so matter isn't even really a distinct substance, but is only known as such by the interpretation of the senses. Kant's sort of odd Dualistic Idealism where there is phenomena and noumena also seems to support this. The noumena have their own existence, independent of our interpretations, with the phenomenal sensory interpretation being but a slice of the totality of that noumena.

In some odd sense, we are left with the option of naive realism... or acceptance of the noumenal, of a representationalism.

Dualism (and Parallelism) in isolation simply do not stack up in any way ~ no-one in science takes it seriously, philosophy has tended strongly away from it. The only ones who perhaps hold fast are the religious crowds whose version of it is of a reality divided into the material plane, and the afterlife ~ with hell being a weird quasi-existence that is affirmed and yet also ignored.

Dualism (and Parallelism) can exist very nicely with a Monism ~ God as the prime substance, Brahman, Tao, Ain Soph, pick your poison. It resolves every single problem Interactive Dualism and Parallelism have, by providing the very medium that they so obvious implicitly need to not be questioned.

Dialectical Monism, Dualistic Monism, Dual-aspect Monism... they all have a two non-base substances that arise out of a base substance, allowing interaction through that common medium.

I struggle to understand the resistance, when both Dualists and Monists get to have their cake and eat it too, seemingly. Both are made happy. Idealism's criticisms get resolved away by removing consciousness as the base substance, and Dualism's criticisms get resolved by not having to worry about interaction any more. God or Spirit is even the source here, in whatever flavour.

But I agree this embodied experience is a Functional Dualism, but I am not sure there is ever a way around that because you will have an Experiencer and what they Experience.

But science only ever progresses using the simplest metaphysics, and scientists are always embodied beings.

I think perhaps you are beginning to see what I am getting at. Dualism may be flawed (like GR+QM) but there are no experiments that can verify Monisms, or Idealist ideas, etc. Science can only grasp at the simplest metaphysics - Dualism - and try to test it.

Even if we decided on Idealism (say) what can we do with it? If matter is simply a thought process by some form of consciousness, show me a possible experiment that might prove that!

David

But science only ever progresses using the simplest metaphysics, and scientists are always embodied beings.

I think perhaps you are beginning to see what I am getting at. Dualism may be flawed (like GR+QM) but there are no experiments that can verify Monisms, or Idealist ideas, etc. Science can only grasp at the simplest metaphysics - Dualism - and try to test it.

Even if we decided on Idealism (say) what can we do with it? If matter is simply a thought process by some form of consciousness, show me a possible experiment that might prove that!

David

But is this thread about science, or about theory of mind? Scientists being embodied minds matters not. They are doing science, not philosophy. Scientific methodology inherently cannot verify any Monism, so it is pointless to engage in questions of theories of mind from a scientific perspective. Science cannot ever grasp at the "simplest" metaphysics that you claim Dualism to be, nevermind the more "complex" ones.

Because this is about theory of mind, philosophy, not science, Dualism alone cannot possibly suffice.

But science only ever progresses using the simplest metaphysics, and scientists are always embodied beings.

I think perhaps you are beginning to see what I am getting at. Dualism may be flawed (like GR+QM) but there are no experiments that can verify Monisms, or Idealist ideas, etc. Science can only grasp at the simplest metaphysics - Dualism - and try to test it.

Even if we decided on Idealism (say) what can we do with it? If matter is simply a thought process by some form of consciousness, show me a possible experiment that might prove that!

David

Science can't decide a metaphysics, they can only find experiments that point to particular metaphysics but this would still be interpretation of data.

And Kastrup, among others, have argued physics is already best served by an Idealist interpretation. Others argue for Informational Realism, and a few are convinced this reality is a Simulation.

But if one wants to speak of Experiencers and Experienced as a kind of Dualism, it wouldn't really be tied to parapsychology. It would just be a basic point of our...well, experience of reality.

Science can't decide a metaphysics, they can only find experiments that point to particular metaphysics but this would still be interpretation of data.

And Kastrup, among others, have argued physics is already best served by an Idealist interpretation. Others argue for Informational Realism, and a few are convinced this reality is a Simulation.

But if one wants to speak of Experiencers and Experienced as a kind of Dualism, it wouldn't really be tied to parapsychology. It would just be a basic point of our...well, experience of reality.

Well Kastrup doesn't seem to consider the question of Occam's razor. Without OR science would drift about aimlessly. I mean you could postulate particles that only interact via gravity or maybe not at all, science absolutely depends on OR. Kastrup also doesn't seem to consider that the consciousness that generates physical interactions presumably doesn't have free will, but does it make sense to talk about consciousness with no free will running the physical world?

David