Lance Bush (2023). “There is no such thing as psychophysical harmony (Part 1).”

Key arguments from the article:

• Type-A physicalism denies the explanandum: there are no phenomenal states, so there is no psychophysical harmony to explain.
• Cutter & Crummett assume the falsity of type-A physicalism without argument, stating “we assume the falsity of so-called ‘a priori’ (or ‘type-A’) physicalism.”
• If type-B physicalism fails to explain psychophysical harmony, this should increase confidence in BOTH theism AND type-A physicalism — not just theism.
• Williamson’s “one philosopher’s modus ponens is another’s modus tollens”: if psychophysical harmony leads to theism, and theism is false, we can reject psychophysical harmony (and the phenomenal states it presupposes) rather than accept theism.
• Problems for type-B physicalism are not automatically evidence for theism; they could equally be evidence for type-A physicalism.
• Type-A physicalism is typically dismissed by incredulity, not substantive argument.