As I remember, Eliot wrote a couple of articles for The Monist.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carrol Cox" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 12:22 PM
> From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
> First published Tue 19 Aug, 2003
> This entry concerns dualism in the philosophy of mind. The term
> 'dualism' has a variety of uses in the history of thought. In general,
> the idea is that, for some particular domain, there are two fundamental
> kinds or categories of things or principles. In theology, for example a
> 'dualist' is someone who believes that Good and Evil - or God and the
> Devil - are independent and more or less equal forces in the world.
> Dualism contrasts with monism, which is the theory that there is only
> one fundamental kind, category of thing or principle; and, rather less
> commonly, with pluralism, which is the view that there are many kinds or
> categories. In the philosophy of mind, dualism is the theory that the
> mental and the physical - or mind and body or mind and brain - are, in
> some sense, radically different kinds of thing. Because common sense
> tells us that there are physical bodies, and because there is
> intellectual pressure towards producing a unified view of the world, one
> could say that materialist monism is the 'default option'. Discussion
> about dualism, therefore, tends to start from the assumption of the
> reality of the physical world, and then to consider arguments for why
> the mind cannot be treated as simply part of that world.
> The entire article is (when pasted into a Word file) 133K. One can see
> why it is possible to blunder about quite a bit when using the term
> "dualism," which is controversial among professional philosophers &
> A clear religious dualism is to be found in Manichaeism -- which St.
> Thomas regarded as the most serious heresy to refute. The charge of
> manichaeism was often a death sentence. The _reason_ theologians
> regarded it as so serious a heresy, of course, is that Christianity
> _does_ continually threaten to collapse into a dualism of good and evil,
> god & the world, matter & soul, etc. My own reading of 4Q would be that
> they represent (among many other things) an immense (but ultimately
> unsuccessful) struggle to _avoid_ dualism. But most good poems probably
> embody an unsuccessful struggle of some sort.
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 9/22/2006