Dualistic arguments fail

All things are possible. If a problem cannot be solved then the problem needs to be rethought until it can be solved. Q.V. Hegelian logic.

An immediate counter to this might be that "unsolvable problem" cannot be solved. The problem with this is like the problem with apparent self-reference in recent blogs: how would we identify an "unsolvable problem"? While it seems that there should be such a thing, in reality it could always be that we haven't looked hard enough. Same problem as identified with falsification. In principle you can't just invent a term logically and then go looking for that thing, or worse argue the nature of real things from the terms which we use to describe them. Q.V. the ontological arguments for God. e.g. God is perfect, and perfect things must exist so God exists etc

Another issue of dualistic statements is that every argument for one side can be mirrored on the other. My lab partner always used to argue that romance does not exist because if you remove the genitals from a woman then she is no longer interesting, so sex is the key. The counter of course is that if you add the genitals to a man then by that argument we would find him sexually appealing. Amusing that example might be but it reveals a universal issue in dualistic arguments.

The challenge when hearing any argument then is to argue the equally valid counter argument.