Journal: Eikon
Volume: EIKON 07:2 (Fall 2025)
Article: The Constitution Of Man: An Examination Of Monism, Dichotomy, And Trichotomy
Author: Drew Sparks

Eikon 7.2 (Fall 2025) p. 48

The Constitution Of Man:
An Examination Of Monism, Dichotomy, And Trichotomy

Drew Sparks

Drew Sparks resides in Terre Haute, Indiana, where he serves as Pastor of Trinity Reformed Baptist Church and Adjunct Professor of Philosophy at Ivy Tech Community College. Drew also serves as an Adjunct Professor of Theology at the International Reformed Baptist Seminary and is a ThM Advisor at Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary. He received a B.A. from Lancaster Bible College, an M.A. (Christian Apologetics) from Veritas International University, and a ThM (Philosophy) and PhD (Systematic Theology) from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He has authored several articles and contributed chapters to various books. He is also a member of the Evangelical Theological Society and the Evangelical Philosophical Society.

The Constitution Of Man

The question before us concerns the constitution of man. Is he exclusively material? Merely immaterial? Or a combination of material and immaterial parts? One can affirm monism, which is the view that man is simply one part. He is either composed of matter — materialistic monism (only matter) — or is purely immaterial — immaterialistic monism or idealism.1 Those who hold that man is composed of two parts argue that man is material and immaterial. Or to use more common parlance: he has a body and a soul. Finally, there are those who hold that man is composed of one material part, the body, and two immaterial parts, soul and spirit. Those who hold that man is composed of two parts (body and soul) are called dichotomists whereas those who hold that man is composed of three parts (body, soul, and spirit) are called trichotomists. In this article, I argue man’s powers, activities, and objects of knowledge require a body and soul but not a spirit as a third constitutive part — thereby affirming dichotomy

This conclusion is not arrived at through the presentation of a taxonomy of views where the strengths and weaknesses of each position are listed and then weighed. Taxonomic approaches often treat positions devoid of their attendant

Eikon 7.2 (Fall 2025) p. 49

philosophical or theological coherence and fail to provide readers with criteria by which certain views may be judged. One might assume that the proper starting place, then, is Scripture which contains God’s authoritative teaching on the nature of man. I wish, however, to develop this position by examining the reader of Scripture in the act of reading. Reading involves objects that are material, such as letters, and immaterial, such as universals and arguments, which in turn require material and immaterial activities of the human person that correspond to the mate...