What is the so called “mind-body” problem? Well, it is…
What is the so called “mind-body” problem?
Well, it is simply the inability of those who adhere to the following aprioiri beliefs or philosophical assumption, namely that every effect has a natural cause, or that everything can be explained in terms of matter, or that everything is physical etc, to understand the interaction of mind and the body in terms of matter.
However this so called problem only exists to the materialist and physicalist because of his or her aprioir beliefs.
I.e physicslism or materialism.
The dualist is obviously not either of the aforementioned.
Hence the so called problem does not exist to the dualist. I am a dualist. Therefore your problem does not exist to me.
Nevertheless i will reveal the root cause of your problem to you.
What is the root cause of your problem?
The answer is as follows:
Your apriori belief or philosophical assumption is the root cause of your problem.
Your problem can be likened to or compared with the problem in the following hypothetical scenario:
Tom believes the following proposition, that is to say, that everything that exists is physical and visible. And subsequently Tom deduced the following proposition from the following observation, namely the movement of a tree branch, namely that the best explanation for the movement of the branch is something visible and physical. The branch or the tree was the only physical and visible thing that Tom could observed. Therefore he concluded as follows, namely that either the branch can move itself or the tree can move its branch. Nevertheless Tom was not satisfied with the reasoning or the explanation which he attributed to the observed fact, particularly because when he subjected the tree to the scientific method he could not observe any visible or physical which could produce the motion.
As a result of this he concluded as follows, namely that the event was a mystery. Or that it was a problem.
However was this really a problem?
Or was the branch really moving itself? Or rather, was is it being moved by something invisible?-particlarly if your research showed you that a branch cannot move itself.
Of-course the answer to the aforementioned question is as follows, namely that the branch was being moved by something invisible. If the aforementioned, then his apriori assumption is false. Hence the consequent is really the case. However he is committed to this belief because he’s invested a lot of time and emotion in it or because he does not like the implication of the aforementioned position. Therefore the event will remain a mystery problem to him. But this is besides the point.
What is the moral of this rational hypothesis?
The moral is as follows;
namely that this problem of explaining the motion of the branch will remain a problem or a mystery to him unless he accepts the possibility of the existence of an invisible thing.
The moral is as follows;
Namely that our unjustified apriori beliefs and assumptions about nature can create problems for us.
But such a problem does not exist to one who believes that something which cannot be seen(i.e the invisible wind) was responsible for moving the branch. The dualist is such a person.
Therefore Tom’s problem would not have existed to a dualist.
I’ll repeat the following again as i prepare to end this post:
Tom’s apriori belief is the basis of his problem.
Similarly, this is why the so called mind-body problem can only exist to the physicalist or materialist. But the dualist is neither of the aforementioned.
Therefore, according to the dualist, there is no real mind-body problem.
Does this mean that we know how the invisible and non physical mind and the body causally interact with each other by means of the central nervous system?
The answer is no! However that we do not know does not imply that they do not interact with each other; just as our inability to understand how the magician does the trick does not imply that he or she did not do it.
Nor does our inability imply that there is a problem, since dualist is not trying to solve anything.
Because if our nature contains a metaphysical dimension, then we can only accept it as it is, or we can only marvel at how wonderful we are, or three is no need to try to explain how, since the metaphysical transcends physics and nature.
The implication of the aforementioned is as follows;
namely that the materialist or physicalist is only wasting his or her time with this so called problem, because there is no natural solution.