ABSTRACT
The selections in Part I considered variations on the thesis of mind-body dualism. Dualism conceives mental processes as essentially “inner,” reflected outwardly in behavior. I immediately apprehend my own conscious mental states, or have a capacity to become so aware by focusing my attention on the matter. I just know “straight away” that I am now having a visual experience representing a computer screen and auditory experience as of keys clicking; I am now believing that I am composing an essay and desiring to make substantial progress on it this day. But for the mental states of everyone else, even those standing directly in front of me, I must infer the presence of a directing mind from the behavior of their bodies. I cannot see or touch their nonphysical minds (not even when their skulls are opened on an operating table). But I do see the effects of such minds in all manner of seemingly goal-directed behavior: walking, talking, reaching, gesturing, looking, smiling, and so on. In my own case, I recognize such outward behavior to flow from my intentions, beliefs, desires, and emotions. (I “perceive” both sides of the causal process.) In the case of others, I see only the effect side, and infer to a similar cause, a purposive mind. To be sure, if the dualist is right, I am not making these inferences in the way I infer the murderer from a series of clues – consciously and deliberately. I am aware of no such reflective inference upon encountering a person (or the person’s bodily aspect). So if I am making something like an inference, it must be the sort that is immediate, automatic, and unconscious.
