Property Dualism Argument

According to the Leibniz's princciple of the indiscernibility of identicals, the philosopher Gottffried Leibniz argues that if 1 and 2 are identical then they have exactly the same property. It means that mind can never be physical object, which is a fact that could be derived here. Additionally the arugument is that no machine or computer in the world can have conscious, i.e., feel of pain, feeling of happiness, sad etc., But by incorporating some additional algorithms and hardwares these computer can be made to act as a conscious object. Hence, the final fact is a physical object can never be conscious. Hence mind is not a physical object
Argument 4: Doubt and existence According to Descartes he agues his own existence based on his dream and he led the premise as follows,
A) I can doubt that I have a body.
The
first premise tell the doubt Descrates has about his own body existence in the physical world. Then he added another premise as,
B) I cannot doubt that I exist,
The premise B tells that, if I am there to dream and doubt about myself, it means that I exist, without my existence I cannot doubt that whether I exist or not. Hence, he concluded that he exist.
From A and B he frames that,
(C) I am not my body and finally he ends up by deriving the premise D,
(D) My mind is not my body.
Finally, Descartes concludes that his mind and body are not the same substance as he has no doubt that he exist but he argues that his mind is not his body, it is something else.

Arguments against substance dualism:
Argument 1: Princess Elizabeth's argument: According to substance dualism the mind and the body are two different substance, additionally Princess added that mind and body are radically different substance, while they are radically different how can they causally interact with each other?

Argument 2: explanatory completeness of physiology: The argument is that according to physiologist it can be described that in Bloggs and lion example, while Bloggs saw the lion, some kind of visual cortex activated the brain region gets activated which in turn responsible for the activation in the motor cortex that gives rise to the motor action in the muscles in the thighs of Bloggs which made him run. So according to physiologists the fact is that the movement of Bloggs are entirely dependent on the physical objects like muscles, brain areas, eyes etc. Here they nonphysical substance had nothing to do anything with it. Hence, the substance dualism fails to explain this theory.

Argument 3: Explanatory weakness of substance dualism: The substance dualism has failed to illuminate the items of general features of mental life which a good theory of mental states should be able to explain.
1. Some mental states are caused by states of the world.
2. Some mental states cause actions.
3. some mental states cause other mental states.
4. some mental states are conscious.
5. some mental states are about things in the world.
6. some kind of mental states are systematically correlated with certain kinds of brain states.
The substance dualism fails in explaining first 2 item at the whole. There is not clue on the third item. Though it speaks about conscious, it does not explain what nonphysical object has conscious and how it is? are not explained properly. The item five deals with the theories of aboutness or content "about something in a world", how come a non physical object can speak about the theory of a physical thing, and the same is not clear in substance dualism. Finally, it is argued that how a nonphysical substance can correlated with a physical states of the brain what mediates between the both to correlate with each other? Hence, the substance dualism fails to answer all the above six statement of mental representations.

Arguments on property dualism (Epiphenomenalism):
Similar to substance dualism epiphenomenalism also faces the three arguments such as i) Princess Elizabeth's problem; ii) the explanatory completeness of physiology; iii) explanatory weakness of substance dualism.
i) Princess Elizabeth's problem: According to property dualism how a two physical properties of the brain can give raise to a nonphysical properties of the brain? However since we accept the causal interactive between two physical objects, why can't we accept the relation between physical and nonphysical object? ii) The explanatory completeness of physiology: It can be arguable that actions such as running away from the lion is always because of muscle contractions and neuron discharges. But according if every events of human action is explained in such physical senses then it means that their no role of nonphysical object in human actions. Thought the epiphenomenalism is on favouring edge of the above explanation, it avoid the objection form the explanatory completeness of physiology termed in item 2 and 3. 2. Some mental states cause actions.
3. some mental states cause other mental
states.

Accepting epiphenomenalism abandons the feature 2 as well as according to epiphenomenalism the mental states are inert, which falsify the statement 3. We can accept that the features of 2 and 3 are completely wrong with regards to epiphenomenalism. But before we give up epiphenomenalism should have a very powerful arguments with regards to it. iii) explanatory weakness of substance dualism: Similar to substance dualism, epiphenomenalism also fails to explain the six statement of mental representations. Epiphenomenalism simply represents that physical properties of the brain can cause nonphysical properties without any proof. Additionally, epiphenomenalism denies that mental states cause action and the mental states can other mental states in argument 2. But on contrast to substance dualism the epiphenomenalism could explain the conscious part which can be acceptable argument.