Mind-Body Dualism and Asymmetry of Standards of Evidence

This paper provides reflection how contemporary analytic philosophy of mind applies justification criteria differently to dualism and physicalism. It shows that arguments in favor of dualism often face increased demands for standards of evidence, while the physicalist position is often treated more leniently. Paper shows that such a gap in standards is not necessarily a mistake, but it does imply implicit metaphysical assumptions in favor of physicalism. The article emphasizes that dualism can be considered a serious rival theory in explaining the nature of consciousness, provided that the justification criteria are applied more equally and the ontological costs of both approaches are taken into account.