Can I survive without my body? Undercutting the Modal Argument

International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 84 (1):71-92 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Modal Arguments in the philosophy of mind purport to show that the body is not necessary for a human person’s existence. The key premise in these arguments are generally supported with thought experiments. I argue that Christians endorsing the Doctrine of the Resurrection have good reason to deny this key premise. Traditional Christianity affirms that eschatological human existence is an embodied existence in the very bodies we inhabited while alive. The raises the Resurrection Question: why would God go through the trouble of resurrecting those bodies? I argue that adequately answering this question requires give up on Modal Arguments within the philosophy of mind.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-08-09

Downloads
80 (#711,681)

6 months
11 (#1,080,318)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Joshua Mugg
Park University

Citations of this work

Resurrecting van Inwagen’s simulacrum: a defense.Jordan L. Steffaniak - 2023 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 93 (3):211-225.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Persons and Bodies: A Constitution View.Lynne Rudder Baker - 2000 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
The Emergent Self.William Hasker - 1999 - London: Cornell University Press.
The Possibility of Resurrection.Peter Van Inwagen - 1978 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 9 (2):114-121.

View all 37 references / Add more references