The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Descartes' Mistake: How Afterlife Beliefs Challenge the Assumption that Humans are Intuitive Cartesian Substance Dualists
Abstract
This article presents arguments and evidence that run counter to the widespread assumption among scholars that humans are intuitive Cartesian substance dualists. With regard to afterlife beliefs, the hypothesis of Cartesian substance dualism as the intuitive folk position fails to have the explanatory power with which its proponents endow it. It is argued that the embedded corollary assumptions of the intuitive Cartesian substance dualist position (that the mind and body are different substances, that the mind and soul are intensionally identical, and that the mind is the sole source of identity) are not compatible with cultural representations such as mythologies, funerary rites, iconography and doctrine as well as empirical evidence concerning intuitive folk reasoning about the mind and body concerning the afterlife. Finally, the article suggests an alternative and more parsimonious explanation for understanding intuitive folk representations of the afterlife.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Inert bodies continue to contain traces of the minds that once inhabited them, which is why corpses present such a profound religious and emotional problem: they are objects -and, within a short period of time, threats to public health -that somehow seem different from ordinary objects.”
From Body and Mind in Early China: An Integrated Humanities–Science Approach (2013) · cites this paper as Hodge 2008
In the citing paper
“Another helpful set of illustrations (both figuratively and literally) of folk mind -body overlap is provided by K. Mitch Hodge in an important study that explicitly critiques Bloom ' s theory of ' innate Cartestianism ' (Hodge 2008).”
From Body and Mind in Early China: An Integrated Humanities–Science Approach (2013) · cites this paper as Hodge 2008
In the citing paper
“Examining examples of funerary rites, mythology, iconography, and religious doctrine drawn from a variety of world cultures, Hodge points out that the folk ' s dualism is clearly not one whereby mind and body are conceived of as entirely different, noninteracting substances.”
From Body and Mind in Early China: An Integrated Humanities–Science Approach (2013) · cites this paper as Hodge 2008
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Hodge, K. M.
- Affiliations
- Queen's University Belfast (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Hodge, K. Mitch
- ORCID
- Hodge, K. Mitch
- Venue
- Journal of Cognition and Culture
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2008
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 387-415
- ISSN
- 1567-7095 (ISSN-L)
- 1568-5373
- OpenAlex
- W2040576436
- Cited by
- 47
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 1.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Cognition and Culture (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
- Keywords
- afterlife beliefs, folk psychology, mind-body dualism, soul, intuitive thinking, funerary practices, mythology, iconography
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review