##Property Dualism
The most glaring and straightforward issue with Material Reductionism as a solution to the Mind-Body Problem is what is known as “Property Dualism.” The argument goes like this:
1. The mind/consciousness and the brain/matter have different properties (Property Dualism). 127
2. Things with non-identical properties cannot be the same thing (The Law of Identity). 128
3. Therefore, the mind/consciousness and the brain/matter cannot be the same thing.
The second premise, the Law of Identity, is simply the most basic axiom of logic. Without it, if we reject it, there can be no logical coherence of any kind in any situation or on any topic. Best we do not reject it, even if only for Pragmatic reasons!
The first premise can Minds/Consciousness are immaterial things capable of acting freely, which do not take up space, have subjective experience, and are entirely private to the individual.
Matter and brains are the exact opposite. You can hold brains and matter, they take up space, others outside of yourself can observe the same brain/matter, they are objectively existent, do not experience free of consciousness, and so forth. So it is logically sound (both valid and objectively true) to say that the mind and matter cannot be the same thing.
Imagine a beautiful woman or man in front of you. You know that your brain is taking up space in your head, but the projected image does not take up any space. Nobody can see your beautiful person but you, and what is beautiful to you may not be for others. Unlike how we can gather around a brain we cannot interact with your projection in any way. This is because the brain and the mind have different properties, making them different things.
##Axiomatic Self
A second basic argument against Material Reductionism is that:
1. Our own mind is the only thing we can be absolutely certain exists, and is the only thing we can ever know directly.
2. Matter is only known through the mind. 130 129
3. We cannot reduce something we know directly to something we know through it, and we cannot reduce something we know with certainty for something we are uncertain of.
4. Therefore, we cannot reduce the mind and consciousness to matter and the brain.
Again, all of these premises are easy to show and you can test them yourself as you read this. The solution to #1 is actually extremely simple. Without a mind or consciousness the very concept of “knowing” or “being aware of something” makes no sense. If you were not a conscious mind you could not know or learn anything. Matter is one of these things you could not know or learn about. Even your own body is only known through your mind. We can scientifically prove this by applying anesthetic to an individual to shut down their consciousness, then performing painful surgeries on them which they do not experience or remember. #3 is a logical statement, for knowledge is hierarchal. For instance we know “I exists” is true, but “the Sun will ‘rise’ tomorrow” is technically only a 99.99% likelihood. It’s possible that the Sun does not rise, but not that “I exist” is a false statement. We are even less certain about something like “there is life elsewhere in the universe” than that the Sun will rise. What we know through the mind is less certain than the fact that the mind itself exists. This makes it unreasonable to suggest we can believe in matter without a belief in mind.
##Existence of other immaterial things
Yet another problem for Material Reductionism is not only that consciousness/the mind are immaterial, but that other immaterial things exist as well. This includes, among others, the existence of Mathematics and Logic. Math and Logic are objective and necessary aspects of the cosmos. So far as we can tell, even without minds there would still be the same number of electrons in a hydrogen atom, and the Sun could still not be identical to the Earth because they have different properties. The Laws of Logic and Mathematics are discovered rather than created, similar to how we discover the laws of physics, behavior, or biology. Yet these laws are also immaterial, in that we cannot access them in any physical way. To reject the objective existence of these immaterial things would be to say that logic, math, and other things are not actually real – illogical things could be true, 2+2 could equal 55.
##One piece of evidence for Materialism refuted
the only evidence for Material Reductionism is: “doing things to the brain also does things to the mind.” This is certainly true. For example if you take a psychedelic drug you will have a trip, if you are given anesthetic then you will be unconscious. There is no doubt about this, but the issue is this is also expected within Dualism and Idealism. In Dualism the brain is a receiver like a TV or radio, and consciousness is processed through it. Surely when your TV or radio stops working you do not believe the stations cease to exist 131! If the brain is a receiver then we would expect consciousness to come through strangely when that receiver is damaged. In Idealism consciousness is foundational, and so the brain actually exists within consciousness. If this is the case then of course the two are tightly related, one relies on the other! It must be noted that even if Dualism or Idealism are false, this evidence is still not suggestive of Material Reductionism itself.
The most glaring and straightforward issue with Material Reductionism as a solution to the Mind-Body Problem is what is known as “Property Dualism.” The argument goes like this:
1. The mind/consciousness and the brain/matter have different properties (Property Dualism). 127
2. Things with non-identical properties cannot be the same thing (The Law of Identity). 128
3. Therefore, the mind/consciousness and the brain/matter cannot be the same thing.
The second premise, the Law of Identity, is simply the most basic axiom of logic. Without it, if we reject it, there can be no logical coherence of any kind in any situation or on any topic. Best we do not reject it, even if only for Pragmatic reasons!
The first premise can Minds/Consciousness are immaterial things capable of acting freely, which do not take up space, have subjective experience, and are entirely private to the individual.
Matter and brains are the exact opposite. You can hold brains and matter, they take up space, others outside of yourself can observe the same brain/matter, they are objectively existent, do not experience free of consciousness, and so forth. So it is logically sound (both valid and objectively true) to say that the mind and matter cannot be the same thing.
Imagine a beautiful woman or man in front of you. You know that your brain is taking up space in your head, but the projected image does not take up any space. Nobody can see your beautiful person but you, and what is beautiful to you may not be for others. Unlike how we can gather around a brain we cannot interact with your projection in any way. This is because the brain and the mind have different properties, making them different things.
##Axiomatic Self
A second basic argument against Material Reductionism is that:
1. Our own mind is the only thing we can be absolutely certain exists, and is the only thing we can ever know directly.
2. Matter is only known through the mind. 130 129
3. We cannot reduce something we know directly to something we know through it, and we cannot reduce something we know with certainty for something we are uncertain of.
4. Therefore, we cannot reduce the mind and consciousness to matter and the brain.
Again, all of these premises are easy to show and you can test them yourself as you read this. The solution to #1 is actually extremely simple. Without a mind or consciousness the very concept of “knowing” or “being aware of something” makes no sense. If you were not a conscious mind you could not know or learn anything. Matter is one of these things you could not know or learn about. Even your own body is only known through your mind. We can scientifically prove this by applying anesthetic to an individual to shut down their consciousness, then performing painful surgeries on them which they do not experience or remember. #3 is a logical statement, for knowledge is hierarchal. For instance we know “I exists” is true, but “the Sun will ‘rise’ tomorrow” is technically only a 99.99% likelihood. It’s possible that the Sun does not rise, but not that “I exist” is a false statement. We are even less certain about something like “there is life elsewhere in the universe” than that the Sun will rise. What we know through the mind is less certain than the fact that the mind itself exists. This makes it unreasonable to suggest we can believe in matter without a belief in mind.
##Existence of other immaterial things
Yet another problem for Material Reductionism is not only that consciousness/the mind are immaterial, but that other immaterial things exist as well. This includes, among others, the existence of Mathematics and Logic. Math and Logic are objective and necessary aspects of the cosmos. So far as we can tell, even without minds there would still be the same number of electrons in a hydrogen atom, and the Sun could still not be identical to the Earth because they have different properties. The Laws of Logic and Mathematics are discovered rather than created, similar to how we discover the laws of physics, behavior, or biology. Yet these laws are also immaterial, in that we cannot access them in any physical way. To reject the objective existence of these immaterial things would be to say that logic, math, and other things are not actually real – illogical things could be true, 2+2 could equal 55.
##One piece of evidence for Materialism refuted
the only evidence for Material Reductionism is: “doing things to the brain also does things to the mind.” This is certainly true. For example if you take a psychedelic drug you will have a trip, if you are given anesthetic then you will be unconscious. There is no doubt about this, but the issue is this is also expected within Dualism and Idealism. In Dualism the brain is a receiver like a TV or radio, and consciousness is processed through it. Surely when your TV or radio stops working you do not believe the stations cease to exist 131! If the brain is a receiver then we would expect consciousness to come through strangely when that receiver is damaged. In Idealism consciousness is foundational, and so the brain actually exists within consciousness. If this is the case then of course the two are tightly related, one relies on the other! It must be noted that even if Dualism or Idealism are false, this evidence is still not suggestive of Material Reductionism itself.