Select Page

Problems with anthropological physicalism/materialism

by | Oct 12, 2018 | Annihilationism, Minor Groups & Issues

  • “Evangelical conditionalists also differ in terms of what we believe the Bible says about the constitution of human beings, and also about whether people are conscious in the intermediate state between death and resurrection. Some are anthropological physicalists or materialists who believe human beings are physical creatures, the functioning of whose minds is dependent upon their living bodies. Others are substance dualists who believe human beings have immaterial souls, but that they lack consciousness between death and resurrection. Still, others embrace a traditional body/soul dualism and contend that the immaterial souls of human beings live on consciously after death (although not immortal in any sense), until a resurrection of the body. The same diversity of perspectives exists within evangelicalism more broadly, and therefore is not a logical requirement or consequence of CI.” (rethinkinghell.com/Rethinking-Hell_Statement-on-Evangelical-Conditionalism.pdf, #8.4, underline added)

Though there are three views mentioned in the above quote, this article will focus only on anthropological physicalism which this same quote above equates with materialism. Anthropological Physicalism/materialism teaches that the mind of the human being is entirely dependent upon the living body. This means that when the human body dies, the human mind ceases to exist. Some conditionalists/annihilatioinists say…

  • “The first man was created when the dust of the earth and the breath of God were brought together (Gen 2: 7), and just as surely as the man did not exist prior to creation, he does not exist when the spirit returns to God who gave it and the dust returns to the earth (Eccl 12:7).” (Peoples, Glen, A., Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism (Kindle Locations 583-586). Cascade Books, an Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers. Kindle Edition, underline added)
  • The sinner who is destroyed both soul and body in hell, and so experiences the second death, is never forgiven, even though he dies, perishes, and is destroyed—or, in other words, he ceases to exist.” (Fudge, Edward William. The Fire That Consumes: A Biblical and Historical Study of the Doctrine of Final Punishment, Third Edition (p. 166). Cascade Books, an imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers. Kindle Edition, underline added)

Problems with Anthropological Physicalism/Materialism

Another way to look at physicalism/materialism is to understand it as the view that everything consists of the physical realm and its properties. There are no other kinds of things other than the physical. Therefore, abstractions, thought, motion, matter, energy, are all properties of the physical and subject to physical laws. Furthermore, it would mean that the mind, the soul, of a person is a property of the physical brain so that when the brain ceases to exist, the mind/soul/spirit also ceases to exist.

  • Physicalism – “…is the philosophical position that everything which exists is no more extensive than its physical properties, and that the only existing substance is physical.”1
  • Materialism – “the theory that physical matter is all there is…It states that everything in the universe is matter, without any true spiritual or intellectual existence.”2

Given this position, there are a number of serious problems with anthropological physicalism/materialism as it relates to people.

  1. Anthropological Physicalism Is Self Refuting: According to physicalism/materialism, everything in the human brain is restricted to the laws of physics and chemistry.  Therefore, electrochemical reactions in the brain are the necessary product of stimuli via our senses.  But, how does one chemical state that leads to another chemical state produce proper logical inference?  Therefore, it cannot be logically argued that physicalism is true since such conclusions would merely be the product of chemical reactions. This means the logic used in defense of anthropological physicalism/materialism cannot be trusted. Therefore, physicalism is self-refuting, and arguments based upon it are automatically suspect.
  2. No Free Will: If everything consists of that which is physical and the properties of the physical, then the brain is restricted to the laws of physics and chemistry.  But this would negate free will since our choices would be limited to the laws of physics and chemistry.  It would appear that our choices are the necessary result of chemical reactions in the brain which occur based on stimulus from her senses. This necessary result due to chemical reactions negates the notion of free will.
  3. Personal Identity is threatened: If physicalism were true and mental entities are properties of the physical, then when the physical brain changes, mental properties must also change.  However, a person’s self-identity consists of his mental properties of thought, intention, self-awareness, purpose, desires, etc.  Therefore, a person who has a slightly different brain than he did twenty years ago, would not be the same person since his brain is different, which would mean his mental properties are different, which in turn would mean that his personal identity is also different. He would not be the same person. Furthermore, if he is not the same person he was 20 years ago, how could he be held responsible for crime he, so to speak, committed 20 years ago if he is not the same person anymore?  Could God then rightfully judge someone who may or may not be the same person who sinned earlier?
  4. Morality Would Be Meaningless:  Since the physical construction of the brain only produces electrochemical reactions in response to sensory stimuli, then it cannot be maintained that any person’s view of morality is right or wrong.  Decisions and beliefs would just be chemical reactions.  If the anthropological physicalist happens to be a Christian and seeks to determine his morality from the Bible, then how can he say that what he reads in the Bible, which causes an electrochemical reaction in the brain, results in free belief concerning moral correctness? How is it not merely a chemical reaction by which the illusion of moral freedom is obtained?
  5. Continuity Problem: If the soul/spirit of a person ceases to exist upon physical death and is to be “resurrected” later on for judgment, how can it be maintained that the first person to exist is the same as the second person to exist?  If I make a chair and then destroy it in a fire, it does not exist. If I construct a second chair with the same material and dimensions as the first, is it the first chair or is that a copy of the first chair? This problem of continuity applies to the human person since where, according to one view of conditionalism, to die means nonexistent. This would mean that the continuity of the human soul is lost. The implication is that second person who is “resurrected” is not actually the same person as the first.  Finally, if the conditionalist wants to say that God can do anything and therefore the second person is the same as the first, he is obligated to show that from Scripture and deal with the issue of continuity proposed here without casually dismissing it by saying “God can do it.”

Conclusion

Anthropological physicalism is full of logical problems. Unfortunately, some conditionalists affirm this fragile position to either further support their annihilationist view of the human soul, or because they have not thought through the ramifications of their position.

Return to Annihilationism Page

References

References
1 philosophybasics.com/branch_physicalism.html
2 allaboutphilosophy.org/materialism.htm

SUPPORT CARM

Thank you for your interest in supporting CARM. We greatly appreciate your consideration!

SCHOOLS USER LOGIN

If you have any issues, please call the office at 385-246-1048 or email us at [email protected].

MATT SLICK LIVE RADIO

Call in with your questions at:

877-207-2276

3-4 p.m. PST; 4-5 p.m. MST;
6-7 p.m. EST

You May Also Like…