1. (a) What is the mind-body problem?
    (b) State Cartesian Dualism.  Define all the technical terms.  State the main idea behind the theory in your own words.
    (c) State Minimal Materialism.  Define all the technical terms.  State the main idea behind the theory in your own words.
    (d) Give an example of a physical object.  Why is this thing a physical object?
    (e) Give an example of a physical property.  What makes this property a physical property?
    (f) Give an example of a mental property.  What makes this property a mental property?

2. (a) What is the Argument from Religion for Dualism?  What sort of reply might a Materialist make to the Argument from Religion?  What do you think of the Argument from Religion?
    (b) What is the Argument from Introspection for Dualism?  What sort of reply might a Materialist make to the Argument from Introspection?  What do you think of the Argument from Introspection?
    (c) What is the Argument from Parapsychological Phenomena for Dualism?  What sort of reply might a Materialist make to the Argument from Parapsychological Phenomena?  What do you think of the Argument from Parapsychological Phenomena?

3. (a) Define the meaning of 'identity' as we used it in class.
    (b) Contrast this concept with the concept of exact similarity.
    (c) Give an example of a false identity sentence. (An identity sentence is a sentence of this form: "x is identical to y.")
    (d) Give an example of a true and informative identity sentence.
    (e) State Leibniz's Law.

4. (a) Present and Explain Descartes' Argument from Doubt Against Minimal Materialism.
    (b) Present and Explain The Parody Argument (the one involving Superman, Clark Kent, and Lois Lane).
    (c) Does The Parody Argument provide support for of cast doubt upon Descartes' Argument from Doubt? How?

5. Ryle says (Concept of Mind, p. 21) that if Dualism were true, then

"Save for doubtful exception of himself, [a person] could never tell the difference between a man and a Robot.  It would have to be conceded, for example, that, for all that we can tell, the inner lives of persons who are classed as idiots or lunatics are as rational as those of anyone else.  ... According to the theory [Dualism], external observers could never know how the overt behavior of others is correlated with their mental powers and processes and so they could never know or even plausibly conjecture whether their applications of mental-conduct concepts to these other people were correct or incorrect."

The problem Ryle is raising has come to be known as the Problem of Other Minds.  In class, I alluded to two interpretations of the Problem of Other Minds:

Interpretation 1 of The Problem of Other Minds
1. If CD is true, then there is no reason at all to think that other people exist.
2. There is reason to think that other people exist.
3. Therefore, CD is not true.

Interpretation 2 of The Problem of Other Minds
1. If CD is true, then then we cannot be absolutely certain that there are other people.
2. We can be absolutely certain that there are other people.
3. Therefore, CD is not true.

    (a) For Interpretation 1, identify which premise a committed Dualist would deny.  Bertrand Russell (in Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits) explained and Sober explains (p. 270-271) how the Dualist would support her claim that this premise is false.  What is the explanation?
    (b) For Interpretation 2, identify which premise a committed Dualist would deny. Explain how the Dualist would support her claim that this premise is false.


6. (a) Present the Argument from The Inconceivability of Causal Interaction.
    (b) Give the rationale for each premise.
    (c) What do you think of this argument against Dualism?  Is it sound?  If not, which premise is false?  Why?