In the body-mind-problem, I myself stand on the side of eliminative physicalism.
I find this position to be the easiest to argue for: We saw persons changing their minds when their brains changed, we saw persons losing their conciousnes when damaging their brains, we've seen changed personalities after brain damage and so on. Also, I myself see that things we once thought to be "obviously true", turned out to be false, e.g. the phlogistin-theorem or ether in physics and so on.
But then, I have no direct evidence for that position: I just have some clues that might show correlation, but no causation. Also, all of the things I said might just be true about our percepted world, not necessarily the reality (e.g. if idealism is true or solipsism).
So, what speaks for and against eliminative physicalism, or is any other position better to be argued for?