Arguments Against Physicalism

The debate between Physicalism and Anti-Physicalism has been an on going argument for a good amount of time. Physicalism is said to be the view that the all things are physical or they rely on other objects that are physical. Many philosophers who are said to be or seem to be anti-physicalists have argued against this theory. Anti-physicalists stance on the matter is that anything that pertains to the mind or the conscious cannot depend on physicality nor is physicality. Nagel has a stance on his view of this matter through his study of conscious that shows how he supports anti-physicalism.
In order to understand Nagel’s argument, we have to define some terms. Qualia are a term that refers to the information we can easily have a hold on pertaining
The first mark states that mental states are intentional. This refers to the fact that the mind makes reality seem different than what it actually may be. The second mark refers to the fact that the mental states are concious’. These marks of the mind make it difficult for physicalists to believe in what the opposing argument may have to say because they believe that through the marks of the mind their theories are infallible. I think this makes the anti-physicalists’ work a little harder for
Nagel says in his analysis that it is rather hard to give an objective point of view of a conscious of another object. He questions whether or not we can actually understand what its like to be a bat. A bat has a lot of characteristics that can be described scientifically such as their perception of depth and motion. These characteristics cannot be described for them and a human or another object cannot know what it is like. This is qualia that we can not receive. The only explanations we can give regarding the experience of a bat or any other physical phenomena has to be in a subjective