Argumentative paper on the philosophical Mind/Body problem

the first part of the essay is meant to explain the Mind-body problem and what it entails. The second part is meant to compare and contrast the strengths and weaknesses of the two theories I chose in the essay. The last part I am meant to give an argument as to why one of the two theories I discussed earlier is theoretically stronger. I just need my paper to be properly edited and fixed. My professor added some comments to my paper which I will provide below. I need someone who truly understands philosophy or who is willing to do the research to make my paper better.

1. This draft is way too long! I’ve suggested some paragraphs that you can cut out to make it shorter. But you should also go through and ask yourself what really needs to be there, in order to do what the essay needs to do, and what doesn’t really add anything.

2. The essay suffers from a confusion between the mind/body problem and substance dualism. I’ll write more about this in the general comments on Part 3 (and have already done so in the general comments on Parts 1 and 2), so you should definitely read those. What you’re calling “structural dualism” is really just Descartes’s theory of substance dualism, which you in effect already discussed under the heading of presenting the basic mind/body problem earlier in the paper. This should all be sorted out in the final draft.

3. I get the sense that part of why you defend property dualism is that you see it as the more scientific theory than substance dualism. This is true to an extent, since it doesn’t hypothesize any mysterious non-physical beings like souls. But it still denies that the mind can ultimately be fully understood in purely physical terms, because it denies that mental properties — things like thinking, feeling, having conscious experience, etc. — are physical properties of the brain. It is important to be clear about this when you present and defend the view.