In this paper I will examine and criticize the arguments David Chalmers gives for rejecting a materialistic account of consciousness in his book The Conscious Mind. I will draw upon arguments and intuitions from the three main schools of thought in the philosophical study of consciousness(a) forms of dualism, (b) materialism, and (c) eliminativism. Chalmers' book deals with what are currently the most controversial issues in the study of consciousness, especially among these three schools of thought, so it provides a good guide to the important issues. This paper will concentrate on the debate between dualist and materialist theories of consciousness. I will draw on the views of Joseph Levine and discussions with Ken Taylor for materialist theories, on Chalmers' book for a dualist perspective, and I will use Dennett's writings for eliminativist considerations. In his book, Chalmers argues that if one is to "take consciousness seriously," one should endorse a dualistic theory like his property dualism because materialism cannot explain how consciousness could amount to physical structures and processes. In the process, Chalmers argues against the eliminativist position which he claims does not "take consciousness seriously." I will begin by explaining the important concepts in the dualist-materialist-eliminativist debate such as consciousness; logical, metaphysical, and natural supervenience; and zombies. Next, I will explicate what I take to be Chalmers' main argument for property dualism. I will then explain where a materialist could object to Chalmers' argument, and how Chalmers tries to rule out such a response. Finally, I will conclude with considerations of the fundamental intuitions and assumptions each of the three views of consciousness leads to, and I will ultimately argue that of all three views, materialism is the best theory. First, what is consciousness? Consciousness is often referred to by philosophers as what it's like...
