Dualism, mental explanations and explanatory exclusion

Kim’s principle of explanatory exclusion (EE) generates the problem of mental explanation for dualism. Gibb argues that Kim’s principle is metaphysically implausible, but shows that a weaker principle EE* generates a similar problem for interactive dualism. In this paper I examine a possible dualistic response to arguments from EE and EE*. It is shown that both arguments from EE and EE* rest on the premises of the argument from overdetermination - causal exclusion and causal closure. Problem of explanatory exclusion can be reduced to the problem of causal overdetermination. I will show how an interactive dualist can make a plausible response to the argument from EE by rejecting the argument from causal overdetermination