Since I’ve been being mean to Edward Feser recently, I think I should note that Vic Reppert has highlighted a good article on John Searle by Feser. Short version: Searle claims he isn’t a property dualist because, while he thinks the mind is not in any way physical, he still thinks that the mind has physical causes. But this is exactly what property dualists think. That Searle is a closet dualist isn’t an original thought, but Feser does a good job of untangling the issues in one very confusing writer.

Oh, long as I’m on the topic of vague alternatives to materialism: Andrew Sullivan just accused someone of taking “a reductionist view of Freeman’s view and his speech.” What does that mean?