The Substance of Consciousness: A Comprehensive Defense of Biblical Substance Dualism

Based on the Work of Brandon Rickabaugh and J.P. Moreland

Part I: Understanding Substance Dualism in the 21st Century

Chapter 1: The Return of Substance Dualism

Rickabaugh and Moreland begin their defense by noting a remarkable shift in contemporary philosophy. At the end of the 19th century, substance dualism was widely accepted. As they quote from U.T. Place: “Ever since the debate between Hobbes and Descartes ended in apparent victory for the latter, it was taken more or less for granted that whatever answer to the mind-body problem is true, materialism must be false” (Chapter 1: “The Return of Substance Dualism”).

However, the 20th century saw what the authors call “The Great Revolt Against Dualism.” Many philosophers and scientists began to reject the idea of an immaterial soul, believing that science could explain everything about human nature through physical processes alone. Yet, as Rickabaugh and Moreland demonstrate, this revolt has failed to provide satisfactory answers to fundamental questions about consciousness, personal identity, and human nature.

The authors identify four major factors contributing to substance dualism’s revival:

1. The Hard Problem of Consciousness: Despite decades of research, materialist philosophers cannot explain how physical brain processes give rise to subjective, first-person conscious experiences. Why does it feel like something to see red or taste chocolate? Physical descriptions of brain states cannot capture these qualitative experiences.
2. The Unity of Consciousness: When you experience multiple things at once – seeing a red apple while hearing music and feeling the cool breeze – all these experiences are unified in a single conscious field. How can a brain made of billions of separate neurons create this unified experience? Rickabaugh and Moreland argue that only a simple, immaterial soul can account for this unity.
3. Personal Identity Over Time: You are the same person who existed ten years ago, despite the fact that most of your body’s cells have been replaced. What accounts for this continuity of identity? The authors argue that an enduring soul provides the best explanation.
4. Libertarian Free Will: We have a strong intuition that we make genuine choices – that we could have done otherwise in many situations. But if we are purely physical beings governed by the laws of physics, how can we have free will? Substance dualism provides room for genuine agency.

Chapter 2: How Staunch Naturalism Shapes the Dialectic

In this crucial chapter, Rickabaugh and Moreland expose how philosophical naturalism – the view that only physical things exist – has improperly dominated discussions about the mind. They quote philosopher Galen Strawson’s striking admission: “Physicalism entails panpsychism” – meaning that if everything is physical, then consciousness must somehow be a fundamental feature of all matter, even electrons and atoms (Chapter 2: “How Staunch Naturalism Shapes the Dialectic”).

The authors distinguish between two types of naturalism:

1. Staunch Naturalism (Strong Physicalism): This view holds that everything that exists is physical and can be fully explained by physics and chemistry. Mental states are nothing more than brain states. Love is just neurons firing. Thoughts are merely chemical reactions.

2. Faint-Hearted Naturalism (Weak Physicalism): This view admits that consciousness seems different from physical processes but still insists it must somehow “emerge” from the brain. However, the authors point out that this emergence is mysterious and unexplained – it’s essentially admitting that materialism cannot fully account for the mind.

A critical insight from this chapter: Rickabaugh and Moreland argue that naturalists often assume their worldview is true without proving it. They write: “Many of the arguments to follow stand alone and are not explicitly related to these background worldview issues. But many of them are explicitly related, and, where appropriate, we employ worldview considerations in stating and evaluating various arguments” (Chapter 2: “Going Forward”).

Part II: Arguments from Introspection and Self-Awareness

Chapter 4: The Real Nature of Introspection Arguments

When you look inside yourself through introspection – when you pay attention to your thoughts, feelings, and experiences – what do you discover? Rickabaugh and Moreland argue that introspection reveals truths about our nature that support substance dualism.

Consider this: When you introspect, you are directly aware of your mental states. You know what it’s like to feel joy, to think about mathematics, or to remember your childhood. These experiences have qualities that seem fundamentally different from physical properties like mass, charge, or spatial location. A thought about justice doesn’t weigh anything. A feeling of love doesn’t have a shape. A memory of your grandmother doesn’t have a specific location in space.

The authors address a common objection called the “Intensional Fallacy.” Critics argue that just because we don’t experience our mental states as physical doesn’t mean they aren’t physical. After all, people once didn’t know that water was H₂O, but that didn’t make water non-physical.

However, Rickabaugh and Moreland provide several powerful responses:

Chapter 5: From Self-Awareness and Intentionality to the Self as Soul

This chapter contains some of the book’s most powerful arguments for substance dualism. Rickabaugh and Moreland present what they call the “Direct Self-Awareness Argument” (DSA).

The Basic Argument: When you are self-aware, you are not just aware of your thoughts or feelings – you are aware of yourself as the subject having those thoughts and feelings. This self that you’re aware of has certain characteristics that no physical object could have.

David Barnett’s Simplicity Argument, which the authors discuss extensively, can be summarized as follows:

1. I know that I exist.
2. I know that I am not a complex object with parts that could be removed.
3. All physical objects are complex – they have parts.
4. Therefore, I am not a physical object.
5. Therefore, I am a simple, immaterial soul.

The authors explain: “When S merely thinks that P [an unfulfilled content], the object is merely intended and not given. It itself does not show up, and it is impossible to check whether the content is true by measuring it against ‘the things themselves'” (Chapter 5: “Direct Reflective Self-Awareness Argument”).

The Eighteen Dualist Seemings:

Rickabaugh and Moreland identify eighteen distinct ways that dualism seems true to us in our everyday experience (Chapter 5: “Eighteen Distinct Dualist Seemings”). Here are some key examples:

• When you close your eyes and introspect, you don’t experience yourself as a brain or body – you experience yourself as a unified center of consciousness.
• You can imagine yourself existing without your body (even if this is actually impossible, the conceivability is significant).
• Your mental states (thoughts, feelings, desires) don’t seem to have physical properties like weight, shape, or location.
• You experience yourself as the same person over time, despite physical changes to your body.
• You experience genuine agency – the ability to make free choices that aren’t determined by prior physical causes.

Part III: The Unity of Consciousness Arguments

Chapter 6: From Phenomenal Unity to the Synchronic Unity of the Immaterial Self

One of the strongest arguments for substance dualism comes from the unity of consciousness. Rickabaugh and Moreland quote Leibniz’s powerful insight: “Furthermore, by means of the soul or form, there is in us a true unity which corresponds to what we call ‘I’; this can have no place in artificial machines or in a simple mass of matter, however organized it may be” (Chapter 6: “Introduction”).

Think about your current conscious experience. You might be:

• Seeing these words on a screen
• Hearing background noise
• Feeling the temperature of the room
• Having thoughts about what you’re reading
• Experiencing emotions about the content

All of these different experiences are unified in a single field of consciousness – your consciousness. They’re not separate experiences happening in isolation; they’re all part of one unified experience that you are having.

The authors present several arguments against physicalist attempts to explain unified consciousness:

1. The Anti-Distribution Argument: Consciousness cannot be distributed across multiple physical parts. If different parts of your brain were each conscious separately, you would be multiple persons, not one.

2. The Process Argument: Physicalists often say consciousness is a process in the brain. But processes are extended over time and space, while conscious unity exists at a single moment and point.

3. The Function Argument: Some argue consciousness is just a function the brain performs. But functions are abstract descriptions of what something does – they can’t explain the concrete reality of unified conscious experience.

Chapter 7: Mereological Essentialism and the Diachronic Endurance of the Soul

This chapter addresses a crucial question: How can you be the same person throughout your life when your body constantly changes? The authors present compelling evidence that only an immaterial soul can account for personal identity over time.

Consider these facts about your body:

• Most of your cells are replaced every 7-10 years
• Your brain’s molecules are constantly being exchanged
• The atoms that make up your body today are completely different from those of your childhood

Yet you remain the same person. You have the same memories, the same core personality, the same sense of being “you.” How is this possible if you are merely a physical body?

Rickabaugh and Moreland quote David Lund’s powerful observation: “Thinking through a complex argument is a continuous mental process that requires sustained mental effort and control of attention throughout its duration. It is a process in which one’s role as an agent seems impossible to doubt—an agent who initiates the process and then continually wills, directs, controls and sustains it” (Chapter 7: “A Defense of Premise (4): Human Persons are Enduring Simple Spiritual Substances”).

Part IV: Modal Arguments and Free Will

Chapter 8: Upgrading Modal Arguments for Substance Dualism

Modal arguments use what’s possible or conceivable to discover truths about reality. The most famous modal argument for dualism can be stated simply:

1. It’s conceivable (and therefore possible) that I could exist without my body.
2. It’s not conceivable that I could exist without my mind/soul.
3. If A can exist without B, then A is not identical to B.
4. Therefore, I am not identical to my body.
5. Therefore, I am my soul.

Critics often object that conceivability doesn’t prove possibility. Just because you can imagine something doesn’t mean it’s actually possible. However, Rickabaugh and Moreland provide sophisticated responses to these objections.

Chapter 9: Staunch Libertarian Agency and the Simple, Enduring Soul

Do we have free will? This question is crucial for Christian theology. If we don’t have free will, then:

• We cannot be held morally responsible for our actions
• Sin becomes meaningless – we couldn’t have chosen otherwise
• God’s commands become pointless – we can’t choose to obey or disobey
• Love becomes mechanical – not a genuine choice

Rickabaugh and Moreland argue that only substance dualism can provide a robust account of free will. They examine several theories:

1. Hard Determinism: Everything, including human choices, is determined by prior physical causes. We have no free will. This view is incompatible with Christian theology and moral responsibility.

2. Compatibilism: We have free will even though our choices are determined, as long as we’re doing what we want to do. But the authors point out this is a “wretched subterfuge” (quoting Immanuel Kant) – if our wants themselves are determined, we’re still not truly free.

3. Libertarian Free Will: We have genuine agency – the ability to choose between real alternatives. Our choices are not determined by prior physical causes.

The authors argue: “If the mind is the brain and the brain is a physical object that works according to natural laws, then there seems to be no room for libertarian agency” (Chapter 9: “Staunch Libertarian Agency and the Simple, Enduring Soul”). Only if we have an immaterial soul that can act as an uncaused cause can we have genuine free will.

Part V: Responding to Common Objections

Chapter 10: Important Frequently Raised Defeaters Against Substance Dualism

Rickabaugh and Moreland systematically address the most common objections to substance dualism. Their responses are thorough and compelling.

Objection 1: The Interaction Problem

How can an immaterial soul interact with a physical body? This is perhaps the most famous objection to dualism, dating back to Princess Elisabeth’s correspondence with Descartes.

The authors provide several responses:

• We know mental causation happens – our thoughts do affect our bodies. Denying this is more problematic than accepting it without fully understanding how.
• Physical causation itself is mysterious. How does one billiard ball really cause another to move? We observe regular correlations, but the nature of causation itself is puzzling.
• If God (who is immaterial) can create and sustain the physical universe, why couldn’t finite immaterial souls interact with physical bodies?

Objection 2: Neuroscience Disproves the Soul

Some argue that neuroscience has shown that all mental states correlate with brain states, proving the mind is just the brain.

Rickabaugh and Moreland’s response is nuanced and powerful:

• Correlation doesn’t prove identity. That mental states correlate with brain states is exactly what dualists would expect if the soul uses the brain as its instrument while embodied.
• Neuroscience actually supports dualism in some ways. Studies on neuroplasticity show that mental practices like meditation can change brain structure – suggesting the mind influences the brain, not just vice versa.
• Near-death experiences, where people report consciousness while clinically brain-dead, provide evidence for consciousness independent of the brain.

The authors note: “There is not the least bit of evidence for the idea that they [dualists] arrived at their belief in the soul’s existence after failing to explain various experiences in terms of what goes on in the physical world” (Chapter 10: “SD as a Soul-of-the-Gaps Argument”). Rather, belief in the soul comes from positive evidence and direct awareness.

Objection 3: Evolution Explains Consciousness

Can’t evolution explain how consciousness arose from matter?

The authors point out severe problems with evolutionary explanations of consciousness:

• Natural selection can only select for behaviors, not for subjective experiences. A philosophical zombie (a being that acts conscious but has no inner experience) would be just as evolutionarily fit as a conscious being.
• Consciousness appears to be an all-or-nothing phenomenon. You’re either conscious or you’re not. This makes it hard to explain through gradual evolution.
• Many aspects of consciousness – like our ability to contemplate abstract mathematics or appreciate beauty – seem to have no survival value.

Biblical Evidence for Substance Dualism

While Rickabaugh and Moreland’s book focuses primarily on philosophical arguments, they recognize that for Christians, biblical evidence is crucial. The Bible consistently presents humans as having both material and immaterial aspects.

Old Testament Evidence

The Hebrew Scriptures use several terms that indicate an immaterial aspect of human nature:

Nephesh (Soul/Life): This term appears over 750 times in the Old Testament. While it can refer to physical life, it often indicates something beyond the merely physical. Genesis 2:7 states that God breathed into man’s nostrils, and man became a “living nephesh” – suggesting something more than just animated matter.

Ruach (Spirit): This word appears almost 400 times and often refers to the immaterial aspect of humans that relates to God. Ecclesiastes 12:7 explicitly states: “The dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.”

Leb/Lebab (Heart): Used over 850 times, this term refers to the center of human personality, thought, and will – clearly more than just the physical organ.

New Testament Evidence

The New Testament is even more explicit about the dual nature of human beings:

Jesus’ Teachings: Jesus clearly distinguished between body and soul. In Matthew 10:28, He said: “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” This statement makes no sense unless the soul is distinct from the body.

Paul’s Anthropology: The Apostle Paul repeatedly speaks of humans as having both material and immaterial aspects. In 2 Corinthians 5:8, he expresses confidence about being “away from the body and at home with the Lord.” In Philippians 1:23-24, he speaks of his desire “to depart and be with Christ,” clearly indicating consciousness surviving bodily death.

The Intermediate State: Multiple passages indicate conscious existence between death and resurrection. Jesus told the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). The parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) depicts conscious existence after death but before resurrection.

What to Be Careful of When Reading Christian Physicalist Literature

Rickabaugh and Moreland provide important warnings about the growing trend of Christian physicalism – the view that humans are purely physical beings without immaterial souls. They particularly critique the work of Nancey Murphy, who has been influential in promoting physicalism among Christians.

Warning Signs in Christian Physicalist Arguments

1. Conflating Scientific and Philosophical Claims

Many Christian physicalists claim that “science has proven” we don’t have souls. But as Rickabaugh and Moreland point out: “Murphy acknowledges that ‘dualism cannot be proven false—a dualist can always appeal to correlations or functional relations between soul and brain/body—but advances in science make it a view with little justification'” (Chapter 10: “Neuroscience and the Explanatory Impotence of SD”). Science can show correlations between brain states and mental states, but it cannot prove that mental states are nothing but brain states.

2. Redefining Biblical Terms

Watch for authors who redefine biblical terms like “soul” or “spirit” to mean something purely physical or functional. The biblical authors clearly understood these terms to refer to something that could exist apart from the body.

3. Ignoring the Intermediate State

Many Christian physicalists struggle to explain what happens between death and resurrection. If we are purely physical, do we cease to exist at death? This contradicts clear biblical teaching about conscious existence after death.

4. Assuming Naturalism

Many Christian physicalists unconsciously adopt naturalistic assumptions. They assume that everything must be explainable in terms of physics and chemistry, forgetting that Christians believe in a God who is spirit and who created both physical and spiritual realities.

5. Misrepresenting Dualism

Be cautious of authors who present dualism as believing the body is evil or unimportant. Biblical dualism affirms that both body and soul are good creations of God. The body is not a prison for the soul but rather its natural partner in this life.

Part VI: Future Research and Implications

Chapter 11: New Research Programs for 21st Century Substance Dualism

Rickabaugh and Moreland conclude their comprehensive defense by outlining future directions for research in substance dualism. They argue that far from being a dead philosophical position, substance dualism opens up exciting new avenues for understanding human nature, consciousness, and our relationship with God.

Key Research Areas:

1. The Nature of Embodiment

How exactly does the soul relate to the body? The authors explore various models of embodiment, noting that the soul is not trapped in the body but rather naturally suited for embodied existence. They write about “the virtues of embodiment” – the goods that come from the soul-body union (Chapter 11: “Developmental SD Research Projects”).

2. Psychological Development

How does the soul develop and mature? While the soul is simple and doesn’t have parts, it can grow in capacities and virtues. This has important implications for understanding spiritual formation and sanctification.

3. Divine-Human Interaction

If humans have immaterial souls, this provides a natural point of contact with God, who is spirit. This helps explain how prayer works, how God can communicate with us, and how we can have genuine relationship with Him.

4. Near-Death Experiences

The growing body of well-documented near-death experiences provides empirical support for consciousness existing independently of the brain. These experiences often involve accurate perception of events while clinically brain-dead.

Theological Implications of Substance Dualism

The truth of substance dualism has profound implications for Christian theology and practice:

1. The Image of God

If humans are purely physical, in what sense are we made in God’s image, given that “God is spirit” (John 4:24)? Substance dualism provides a clear answer: we bear God’s image primarily in our immaterial souls – our capacity for reason, morality, creativity, and relationship.

2. The Incarnation

The orthodox understanding of the Incarnation – that the eternal Word took on human nature – makes most sense if human nature includes an immaterial aspect. Christ took on not just a human body but a complete human nature, including a rational soul.

3. Salvation and Sanctification

Scripture speaks of salvation affecting the whole person – body, soul, and spirit. Sanctification involves the renewal of the mind (Romans 12:2) and the transformation of the inner person. This language makes little sense if we are purely physical.

4. Ethics and Moral Responsibility

If we are purely physical beings determined by natural laws, how can we be held morally responsible? Substance dualism, with its affirmation of libertarian free will, provides a foundation for genuine moral responsibility.

Practical Applications for Christian Living

Understanding that we are embodied souls has practical implications for how we live as Christians:

1. Spiritual Disciplines

Practices like prayer, meditation, and contemplation make sense because we have immaterial souls capable of communing with God. These aren’t just psychological exercises but genuine spiritual activities.

2. Understanding Death

Death is not the end of existence but a temporary separation of soul and body until the resurrection. This provides comfort in grief and hope in the face of mortality. As Paul says, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8).

3. The Value of the Body

While affirming the soul’s existence, biblical dualism also affirms the body’s importance. Our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19). We should care for our bodies while recognizing they are not all we are.

4. Mental Health and Spiritual Warfare

Understanding human dual nature helps us recognize that some struggles may be primarily physical (requiring medical treatment), while others may be primarily spiritual (requiring spiritual interventions). Often, both dimensions need attention.

5. Personal Identity and Purpose

Knowing we are more than our bodies provides stability for personal identity through physical changes – aging, illness, or disability don’t diminish who we essentially are. Our ultimate purpose transcends physical existence.

Responding to Contemporary Challenges

Artificial Intelligence and Human Uniqueness

As AI becomes more sophisticated, questions arise about what makes humans unique. Rickabaugh and Moreland’s work provides a clear answer: we have immaterial souls with genuine consciousness, not just complex information processing. They discuss “Artificial Intelligence Test Seemings” – our intuitive recognition that even the most sophisticated AI lacks genuine consciousness (Chapter 5: “Artificial Intelligence Test Seemings”).

No matter how complex a computer becomes, it will only simulate consciousness, not possess it. True consciousness requires an immaterial soul, not just complex physical processes.

Transhumanism and Human Enhancement

The transhumanist movement seeks to transcend biological limitations through technology. But if we are essentially souls, not bodies, then changing our bodies – even radically – doesn’t fundamentally change who we are. Our identity and value come from our souls, created in God’s image.

Bioethics and the Beginning of Life

When does human life begin? If humans are embodied souls, this question becomes crucial. The substance dualist position supports the view that a new human person exists from conception – when a new human organism with the capacity for rational soul comes into existence.

The Scientific Credibility of Substance Dualism

Critics often claim that substance dualism is unscientific. Rickabaugh and Moreland powerfully refute this charge:

1. Science Has Limits

Science studies the physical world through observation and measurement. By definition, it cannot study immaterial realities directly. To say science disproves the soul is like saying telescopes disprove love – it’s a category error.

2. Science Assumes Consciousness

Scientific observation requires conscious observers. Scientists must trust their conscious experiences, their reasoning, and their sensory perceptions. Science cannot explain away the very consciousness it depends upon.

3. Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness

Some interpretations of quantum mechanics suggest consciousness plays a fundamental role in physical reality. The measurement problem in quantum mechanics – how observation causes wave function collapse – may point to consciousness being more fundamental than matter.

4. The Hard Problem Remains Unsolved

Despite decades of neuroscience research, the hard problem of consciousness – how physical processes give rise to subjective experience – remains completely unsolved. This persistent explanatory gap suggests consciousness cannot be reduced to physical processes.

Historical Support for Substance Dualism

Rickabaugh and Moreland demonstrate that substance dualism has been the dominant view throughout history:

Ancient Philosophy

• Plato: Argued that the soul is the true self, temporarily united with the body
• Aristotle: While his view is debated, he clearly believed in an immaterial aspect of human nature
• Stoics: Believed in a rational soul that survived bodily death

Early Christian Thought

• Augustine: Strongly defended the soul’s immateriality and its superiority to the body
• Thomas Aquinas: Developed sophisticated arguments for the soul’s existence and nature
• The Church Fathers: Virtually unanimous in affirming the soul’s existence

Modern Philosophy

• Descartes: Famous for his clear distinction between mind and body
• Leibniz: Argued for simple, indivisible souls
• Kant: While critical of some arguments, affirmed practical reasons for believing in the soul

Contemporary Revival

The authors document the remarkable revival of substance dualism among contemporary philosophers:

• Richard Swinburne (Oxford)
• Alvin Plantinga (Notre Dame)
• Robert Adams (Oxford)
• Dean Zimmerman (Rutgers)
• Timothy O’Connor (Indiana)

This revival is particularly striking given the materialist dominance in mid-20th century philosophy. The persistent problems with physicalism have led many philosophers back to dualism.

The Unity of Truth: Philosophy, Science, and Theology

One of the most important contributions of Rickabaugh and Moreland’s work is showing how philosophical arguments, scientific evidence, and biblical theology converge on substance dualism. Truth is unified – what is philosophically sound should align with biblical revelation and not contradict genuine scientific findings.

Philosophical Convergence

The philosophical arguments – from consciousness, personal identity, free will, and intentionality – all point toward substance dualism. These independent lines of evidence converge on the same conclusion: humans have immaterial souls.

Scientific Compatibility

While science cannot directly study the soul, scientific findings about consciousness, near-death experiences, and the limitations of physical explanations are compatible with and even suggestive of substance dualism.

Theological Necessity

Core Christian doctrines – the image of God, moral responsibility, life after death, the incarnation – make most sense within a dualist framework. The Bible consistently presents humans as having both material and immaterial aspects.

Common Misunderstandings About Substance Dualism

Rickabaugh and Moreland address several common misunderstandings about their position:

Misunderstanding 1: “Dualism Makes the Body Evil”

Correction: Biblical dualism affirms that both body and soul are good creations of God. The body is not a prison but the soul’s natural partner. The ultimate hope is not escape from the body but resurrection – the reunion of soul and glorified body.

Misunderstanding 2: “Dualism Is Scientifically Outdated”

Correction: Science studies the physical world; it cannot disprove immaterial realities. The persistent failure to explain consciousness physically actually supports dualism. Many contemporary scientists and philosophers find dualism more plausible than physicalism.

Misunderstanding 3: “Dualism Cannot Explain Mind-Body Interaction”

Correction: While the exact mechanism is mysterious, we know mental causation occurs – our thoughts do affect our bodies. Physical causation itself is mysterious. If God (immaterial) can create and sustain the physical universe, finite souls can interact with bodies.

Misunderstanding 4: “Dualism Leads to Neglect of Physical Health”

Correction: Understanding our dual nature actually emphasizes the importance of caring for our bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit. Physical and spiritual health are interconnected while embodied.

Misunderstanding 5: “Dualism Is Greek Philosophy, Not Biblical”

Correction: While Greek philosophers discussed the soul, the biblical teaching is distinct and predates Greek influence. The Old Testament clearly teaches human immaterial aspects. Jesus and the apostles explicitly taught soul-body distinction.

The Explanatory Power of Substance Dualism

Rickabaugh and Moreland demonstrate that substance dualism has superior explanatory power compared to physicalism. It explains:

What Physicalism Cannot Explain

• The Unity of Consciousness: How billions of separate neurons create one unified conscious experience
• Qualia: The subjective, first-person nature of experiences – what it’s like to see red or taste chocolate
• Intentionality: How thoughts can be about things – how mental states have content and meaning
• Personal Identity: How you remain the same person despite complete physical change
• Free Will: How we can make genuine choices if we’re purely physical beings governed by natural laws
• Rationality: How we can reason to truth if our thoughts are just chemical reactions
• Moral Responsibility: How we can be held accountable if we’re determined by physics
• Mathematical Knowledge: How physical brains grasp abstract, eternal mathematical truths

What Substance Dualism Explains Naturally

All these phenomena make perfect sense if humans have immaterial souls:

• Consciousness is unified because the soul is simple and indivisible
• Qualia exist because mental states are states of an immaterial soul, not physical states
• Intentionality is a basic feature of mental states in the soul
• Personal identity persists because the soul endures through physical changes
• Free will exists because the soul can act as an unmoved mover
• Rationality works because the soul can grasp abstract truths
• Moral responsibility is real because souls have genuine agency
• Mathematical knowledge is possible because immaterial souls can grasp immaterial truths

The Pastoral and Practical Importance

Understanding substance dualism has profound pastoral and practical importance:

In Counseling and Pastoral Care

Recognizing human dual nature helps pastors and counselors understand that:

• Some problems are primarily spiritual and need spiritual solutions
• Some problems are primarily physical and need medical treatment
• Often both dimensions need attention
• Medication for mental illness is not unspiritual – it helps the brain that the soul uses
• Spiritual disciplines remain important even when physical treatments are needed

In Understanding Suffering

Substance dualism provides resources for understanding suffering:

• Physical suffering doesn’t diminish our essential identity or worth
• The soul can grow and mature through bodily affliction
• Death is not the final word – the soul survives
• Our ultimate hope is resurrection – soul reunited with glorified body

In Spiritual Formation

Knowing we have souls affects how we approach spiritual growth:

• Prayer is real communication between our spirit and God’s Spirit
• Meditation and contemplation engage our immaterial faculties
• Scripture transforms us by renewing our minds – our soul’s rational capacities
• Worship involves our whole being – body and soul together

In Evangelism and Apologetics

Substance dualism provides powerful apologetic resources:

• Human consciousness points to realities beyond the physical
• Our moral intuitions make sense if we’re more than matter
• The universal human sense of transcendence reflects our spiritual nature
• The fear of death and hope for afterlife are rational if we have souls

Conclusion: The Enduring Truth of Substance Dualism

Rickabaugh and Moreland’s comprehensive defense of substance dualism demonstrates that this ancient view remains philosophically robust, scientifically respectable, and biblically faithful. Far from being an outdated relic, substance dualism offers the best explanation for human nature and consciousness.

The convergence of these independent lines of evidence powerfully supports substance dualism. When philosophical argument, empirical observation, and biblical revelation all point in the same direction, we have strong reason for confidence.

The Stakes

The question of whether humans have souls is not merely academic. It affects:

• How we understand ourselves and our purpose
• How we approach life, death, and eternity
• How we treat others – seeing them as embodied souls made in God’s image
• How we understand salvation and spiritual growth
• How we maintain hope in the face of physical decline and death

The Call to Action

For Christians, understanding and defending substance dualism is crucial for several reasons:

1. Theological Integrity: Core Christian doctrines depend on humans having souls. We must be able to articulate and defend this biblical truth.

2. Pastoral Effectiveness: Understanding human nature as body and soul enables more effective ministry, counseling, and spiritual direction.

3. Cultural Engagement: As materialism dominates our culture, Christians must be able to present a compelling alternative vision of human nature.

4. Personal Confidence: Knowing we are more than our bodies provides stability and hope through all of life’s changes and challenges.

Final Thoughts

Rickabaugh and Moreland have provided the philosophical tools and arguments needed to confidently affirm that humans are embodied souls. Their work demonstrates that substance dualism is not a philosophical weakness to be embarrassed about, but a profound truth to be celebrated and defended.

As we face challenges from materialism, artificial intelligence, transhumanism, and other contemporary issues, the ancient truth that humans are both body and soul remains not only relevant but essential. We are neither mere machines nor disembodied spirits, but embodied souls created in the image of God, destined for eternal life through Christ’s redemption.

The evidence is compelling: philosophical arguments demonstrate the reality of the soul, scientific findings are compatible with dualism, and Scripture clearly teaches it. The substance of consciousness – that irreducible, first-person, qualitative nature of experience – points unmistakably to our immaterial souls.

Appendix: Key Terms and Definitions

To help readers better understand the technical discussions in Rickabaugh and Moreland’s work, here are key terms used throughout their defense of substance dualism:

Substance Dualism:

The view that humans consist of two distinct substances – a physical body and an immaterial soul/mind.

Physicalism/Materialism:

The view that humans are purely physical beings with no immaterial soul.

Property Dualism:

The view that while humans are physical substances, they have irreducible mental properties.

Emergent Dualism:

The view that the soul emerges from complex brain activity but then exists as a distinct substance.

Qualia:

The subjective, qualitative aspects of conscious experience – what it’s like to experience something.

Intentionality:

The aboutness of mental states – their ability to be directed at or represent objects.

Phenomenal Unity:

The fact that diverse conscious experiences are unified in a single field of consciousness.

Libertarian Free Will:

The ability to make genuine choices between alternatives – the power to do otherwise.

Modal Arguments:

Arguments based on what is possible or conceivable, used to discover necessary truths.

Mereological Simplicity:

Having no proper parts – being indivisible and uncomposed.

Direct Self-Awareness:

Immediate, non-inferential awareness of oneself as a subject of experience.

The Hard Problem of Consciousness:

The problem of explaining how physical processes give rise to subjective experience.

Epiphenomenalism:

The view that mental states are caused by physical states but have no causal power themselves.

Interactionism:

The view that the soul and body causally interact with each other.

Resources for Further Study

For readers interested in exploring these topics further, Rickabaugh and Moreland’s extensive bibliography points to numerous important works:

Classic Works on Substance Dualism

• Richard Swinburne, “The Evolution of the Soul”
• J.P. Moreland and Scott Rae, “Body and Soul”
• Stewart Goetz and Charles Taliaferro, “A Brief History of the Soul”
• William Hasker, “The Emergent Self”
• Howard Robinson, “From the Knowledge Argument to Mental Substance”

Biblical and Theological Studies

• John Cooper, “Body, Soul, and Life Everlasting”
• Joel Green (editor), “In Search of the Soul” (includes both dualist and physicalist perspectives)
• Keith Ward, “The Soul: A Guide for the Perplexed”

Philosophical Arguments

• David Chalmers, “The Conscious Mind” (on the hard problem of consciousness)
• Robert Koons and George Bealer (editors), “The Waning of Materialism”
• Tim Crane and Sarah Patterson (editors), “History of the Mind-Body Problem”

© 2025, Matthew. All rights reserved.