<p>The failure of strict physicalism in comprehending mental states has led to the emergence of less strict forms of physicalism. But I argue that the loose physicalists undermine the physicalist position by granting some ontological status to mental events. This leads them (loose physicalists) to either a dualism that is inconsistent with physicalism (where mental states have causal powers) or a dualism that is consistent with physicalism (epiphenomenalism: mental states are causally ineffectual). I argue that these two defects are mutually complementary: as long as one is a physicalist, denouncing one will automatically be to court the other, thereby ensuring that loose physicalism on the whole is a fundamentally dilemmatic position to hold regarding the mind–body problem.</p>