Concerning Humanity
Southwestern Journal of Theology
Volume 59, No. 1 – Fall 2016
Managing Editor: W. Madison Grace II
By J.P. Moreland. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2014. 208 pages. Paperback, $14.99.
Few topics titillate the contemporary philosophical admirer more than the mind and body debate. Physicalists, believing they have the higher philosophical and scientific ground, are ever ready to defend their stance and castigate the dualist. Indeed, physicalists do have powerful and thoughtful arguments to bolster their claims, not to be taken lightly by the dualist. Nonetheless, the dualist is not left to the fate of philosophical obscurity. In his new book, The Soul: How We Know It’s Real and Why It Matters, J.P. Moreland defends the existence of the non-physical soul, detailing why the belief in and existence of the soul is important to the social structure and its moral foundation.
Moreland begins the book with a brief introduction to the topic, noting that “[t]hroughout history, the vast majority of people, educated and uneducated alike, have been dualists” (9). This situation, however, has changed with contemporary philosophy. Today, dualism, at least within academia, seems to be the minority view. Moreland writes that the Bible clearly teaches that “consciousness and the soul are immaterial,” and this reality has massive ethical implications for the Christian (18).
In chapter 1, titled “A Toolbox for the Soul”, Moreland gives a general overview of the debate, explains basic terminology, and summarizes dualism and physicalism. He need not (and does not) delve into the nuances of contemporary scholarship that often obfuscate rather than elucidate. In fact, his explanations of “substances” and “properties” are probably the most difficult area of the chapter, but he writes with the clarity of an experienced educator.
Chapter 2, titled “The Bible on the Soul and Consciousness”, gives a detailed assessment of the biblical understanding of human nature. Moreland skillfully interprets not only Scriptural passages indicating the duality of human nature, but also the original words within the texts. While there are certainly different interpretations of Moreland’s selected texts, he shows that dualism has the stronger biblical defense.
Chapter 3, titled “The Nature and Reality of Consciousness”, analyzes the minutiae of consciousness. Here Moreland gives a quasi-defense and critique of property dualism, two objections to substance dualism, and lays out his best critique of a scientific defense of physicalism. Plus, it is within this chapter that he draws the specific conclusion that consciousness is non-physical. The chapter seems a little out-of-place, but in conjunction with chapter 4, the arrangement makes sense.
In Chapter 4, titled “The Reality of the Soul”, Moreland gives descriptions of three types of substance dualism: Cartesian, Thomistic, and Emergent. His preference is Thomistic dualism, but he is not concerned with defending his druthers here. His focus is to present arguments that prove the “self or ego is an immaterial substance that bears consciousness” (118). Here Moreland gives his most detailed arguments for dualism (for the most part, these arguments are for a specialist in the field).
Chapter 5, “The Future of the Human Person”, is a general (sometimes anecdotal) look at the afterlife (i.e., what happens to the soul after the physical body dies). The Christian reader will find Moreland’s defense for eternal punishment and eternal reward interesting; however, the chapter does not add to his overall claim; it simply discusses peripheral topics.
Moreland has at least one questionable claim that is difficult to overlook. In the last chapter, Moreland gives a defense to the question: Why would God create people that He knew would not choose Him? To answer this question, Moreland borrows a move developed by William Lane Craig’s defense of middle knowledge.
Moreland writes,
Creating a world with a large number of people may have the result that a number of them may be permitted to be lost in order to respect human freedom and accomplish some task known by God . . . God prefers a world in which some persons freely reject Christ but the number of saved is maximized, over a world in which a few trust Christ and none are lost (184).
Thus, according to Moreland, “[t]he actual world contains an optimal balance between saved and unsaved, and those who are unsaved would never have received Christ under any circumstances” (185).
This proposition seems problematic. Assuming that middle knowledge is an accurate description of God’s foreknowledge, are we to postulate there is no possible world in which God both actualizes a maximal number of people that freely choose Christ and refrains from actualizing anyone who would freely reject Christ (and thereby be damned)? Given the standard parameters of possible worlds, it seems God could create this world. Middle knowledge certainly does not rule out such a world.
Ultimately, Moreland’s answer does little to alleviate these problems, and forces the Christian to bunt to mystery. To claim that it is possible God could not have created a world in which no one freely rejects Him, leaves open that He possibly could have created such a world. And if God could have created such a world, then a middle knowledge move seems to be a philosophical stalemate.
Though there are many positive and important aspects of The Soul, three need be mentioned. First, since the depths of this topic are generally reserved for the specialist, it is advantageous for Christians to have a clear and simple (though intellectually stirring) description of dualism. The debate regarding this issue has become so philosophically nuanced that only the trained philosopher can understand much of the contemporary discussion. The Soul is a lucid, concise reflection that a novice in philosophy could understand. Second, Moreland keeps the subject focused and narrow. Thus, he gives the reader the essentials of the conversation by centering on the dominant points of the debate. Third, Moreland, having years of teaching and writing experience, does not simplify the topics to such an extent that he cheapens the depth of the given information. Readers can be sure they are getting a standard, precise explanation of the debate, articulated from the simple to more complex. Thus, The Soul is a valuable contribution to a conversation that commonly ostracizes the curious neophyte.
