In the concluding episode of a rich dialogue on the Mind Matters News podcast, Dr. JP Moreland — one of the foremost thinkers in philosophy of mind — joins host Pat Flynn to unpack his most forceful arguments for the existence of the soul. This final installment focuses on the inadequacy of physicalist explanations for consciousness and the deep implications of our immaterial nature for moral responsibility and human dignity.

The “What-it’s-like” of consciousness

Moreland begins with an observation: every state of consciousness is accompanied by a subjective quality — what it is like to be in that state. There is a particular texture to experiencing pain, tasting a lemon, or thinking about George Washington. This “what-it’s-like” quality defies physical explanation. Neurons may fire, and chemical exchanges may occur, but these events have no intrinsic subjectivity. Physical descriptions — no matter how detailed — fail to capture the interior experience.

The implications of this observation are profound. If consciousness has properties that no physical thing possesses, then consciousness cannot be physical. This opens the door to dualism — the idea that the human person is more than just a body or brain, but also a soul or immaterial self.

Panpsychism: A philosophical detour

Flynn brings up panpsychism, which sees consciousness as a fundamental feature of all matter. Moreland critiques the recent revival of this view as a philosophical sleight of hand. While panpsychists recognize the explanatory gap in physicalism, they attempt to fill it by smuggling quasi-conscious properties into fundamental particles. Moreland argues that panpsychism is not a minor extension of naturalism but an entirely different paradigm — and one that borrows explanatory capital from theism.

He goes on to point to panpsychism’s problem of unity. If consciousness is spread throughout bits of matter, how do those bits unify into a single conscious experience? Using the analogy of a crowd at a football game, Moreland explains that if each conscious bit focuses on something different, there’s no unified field of awareness. The very idea of a “self” evaporates.

Direct awareness of the self

One of Moreland’s most compelling arguments is the argument from introspection: we directly experience ourselves as unified, enduring subjects. We are not merely collections of parts or passing brain states. Children, even before religious training, intuitively believe in the soul. In cultures around the world — religious or not — people naturally assume that they are more than bodies, and that some part of them could survive death. This universality, Moreland argues, is not a product of religious indoctrination but a reflection of self-awareness. Dualism is not just an abstract theory; it’s the natural interpretation of our lived experience.

Indivisibility of the person

Physical things can be divided, but persons cannot. A person who loses part of the brain is not 60% of a person but rather a full person with diminished function. Some individuals with severe brain anomalies (such as those with Dandy-Walker syndrome) function relatively normally despite a significantly diminished brain. This strongly suggests that personhood does not depend on the presence of a complete brain. Unlike physical objects, persons are all-or-nothing entities, which supports the conclusion that the self is immaterial.

Free will and moral responsibility

A physicalist view of the human person assumes that our actions are entirely governed by physical laws. Moreland presents a thought experiment: A mad scientist implants a chip in Moreland’s brain, forcing him to punch a passerby. In such a scenario, he would not be morally responsible; the scientist would be. True moral responsibility requires free will — an ability to choose or refrain.

If we are nothing more than physical systems, then free will is an illusion, and with it, moral responsibility vanishes. This is why some legal theorists have begun favoring rehabilitation over retributive justice. But for Moreland, this shift undermines the foundation of ethics. His Aristotelian view of human nature offers a third option — acts are motivated by reason, grounded in a rational soul with the power to deliberate and choose.

Why this matters

Moreland emphasizes that these issues aren’t just philosophical curiosities. Our answers to questions like: What is a human being? Can we survive death? Are we morally accountable for our actions? shape ethics, law, religion, and even public policy.

Moreland encourages both believers and skeptics to investigate the arguments he offers. He contends that the dualist view isn’t an irrational leap of faith but a well-supported, philosophically robust position. For Christians, it strengthens their worldview. For skeptics, it presents a challenge to materialist assumptions and a reason to take metaphysical questions seriously.

Further Reading

For those interested in diving deeper, Moreland recommends his chapter in Minding the Brain (Discovery Institute Press 2023), “Neuroscience and the Metaphysics of Consciousness and the Soul,” as well as his comprehensive book,The Substance of Consciousness (Wiley-Blackwell 2023), co-authored with Brandon Rickabaugh. These works provide an in-depth look at the arguments presented in the interview and extend them into broader philosophical territory.

In sum, Moreland’s case for the soul is not only a powerful critique of physicalism but a call to rediscover the profound mystery — and dignity — of being human.

Here are the previous installments of the discussion:

The soul and human dignity: A conversation with JP Moreland In his view, only a view that affirms an intrinsic, shared human nature can sustain a belief in universal human dignity. Far from being outdated, the soul remains a vital concept for any worldview that takes seriously the realities of consciousness, freedom, and human equality.

and

JP Moreland: Which model of the mind best explains reality? Moreland notes that the soul’s organizing role in the body sounds a lot like what scientists now call information. The physicalist claim that everything about us can be explained by biology, chemistry, and physics leaves out important parts of reality.