260 NONMONOTHEISTIC CONCEPTIONSThe problem with this sort of argument is that, in each case, the italicized
middle premise is false. “Can” here means “it is logically possible that.”
Consider these objections:
Reply To Argument 1: I can (It is logically possible that I) think of the
cat Socks without thinking of the Clintons’ favorite cat,
because it is logically possible that Socks is not the
Clintons’ favorite cat. But it does not follow from this that
Socks is not the Clintons’ favorite cat.
Reply To Argument 2: I cannot be mistaken if I think that two is greater
than one, and I can be mistaken if I think that your favorite
number is greater than one, but it does not follow that your
favorite number is not two.
Reply To Argument 3: I cannot doubt that I exist but I can doubt that I
am the one who is supposed to take out the garbage, but it
does not follow that I am not the one who is supposed to
take out the garbage.
Reply To Argument 4: I can be directly aware of my being in pain and I
cannot be directly aware of my feeling worse than ever
before, but it does not follow that my being in pain is not
my feeling worse than ever before.
Epistemological arguments such as these fail to prove their conclusions. The
question remains as to whether other sorts of arguments are better.
Arguments for Jain dualism
Philosophers James W. Cornman and Keith Lehrer remark that
mind–body dualism seems to be essential to most religions. The
body will disintegrate after death, but according to the doctrines of
many religions, the soul, the immaterial part of us which is quite
distinct and different from the body, will live on eternally... The
primary philosophical problem is to find out whether dualistic
interactionism or some other position is the most plausible view
about the nature of a person.^30This remark fits at least Jainism. Consider this argument:
1 It is logically possible that Manindra is self-conscious and Manindra has
no bodily states.