Dual-aspect physicalism is a metaphysical position that combines elements of physicalism and dualism, two philosophical views that are often seen as being at odds with one another. In contrast to physicalism, which holds that all aspects of reality can be explained by the laws of physics, dual-aspect physicalism asserts that physical reality is composed of two distinct aspects: the physical and the mental. While the physical aspect is composed of the physical objects and forces that make up the universe, the mental aspect is composed of conscious experience, which cannot be reduced to the physical but is nonetheless real and ontologically fundamental.
Dual-aspect physicalism has been developed in recent decades as an attempt to reconcile the two traditional philosophical positions of physicalism and dualism. It is argued that, by recognizing the dual nature of physical reality, dual-aspect physicalism offers a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of reality than either physicalism or dualism can provide on its own. The position has been defended by numerous philosophers, including David Chalmers, Galen Strawson, and Manuel de Landa.
The main argument in support of dual-aspect physicalism is that it provides a more satisfying explanation of reality than physicalism or dualism. According to dual-aspect physicalism, physical reality is composed of two distinct components: the physical and the mental. This allows for a more robust understanding of reality, as it acknowledges both the physical and the mental aspects of reality, rather than reducing one to the other. In addition, dual-aspect physicalism allows for a better explanation of consciousness, as it recognizes the ontological reality and importance of conscious experience, without reducing it to physical processes.
Despite its potential benefits, dual-aspect physicalism has been met with criticism from some philosophers. Critics argue that, while dual-aspect physicalism provides an interesting way of reconciling physicalism and dualism, it does not necessarily provide a more satisfactory explanation of reality than either position can provide on its own. In addition, some have argued that dual-aspect physicalism fails to adequately explain the relationship between the physical and the mental aspects of reality, as well as how the two interact with one another.
Despite its critics, dual-aspect physicalism remains an important and influential philosophical position. It provides an interesting way of reconciling physicalism and dualism, and offers a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of reality than either position can provide on its own. As such, dual-aspect physicalism is sure to remain an important topic of philosophical debate in the years to come.
References
Chalmers, D. (2003). Consciousness and its Place in Nature. In S. Stich & T. Warfield (Eds.), The Blackwell Guide to Philosophy of Mind (pp. 127–152). Oxford: Blackwell.
De Landa, M. (2000). A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History. New York: Zone Books.
Strawson, G. (2006). Realistic Monism: Why Physicalism Entails Panpsychism. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 13(10–11), 3–31.