Abstract

Abstract This paper presents and discusses the most influential attempts to characterize physicalism without postulating relations of identity between the physical and the prima facie non-physical. The first section deals with a possible criticism that these attempts are misguided, since they contradict the physicalist slogan “everything there is physical.” In the second section, I elucidate the different formulations of the physicalist supervenience claim, and argue that none of them consists in an adequate characterization of physicalism. Three reasons are given in favor of this conclusion: their compatibility with forms of dualism (or pluralism); the fact that the supervenience relation is left unexplained; and Kim’s causal exclusion argument, which asserts that merely supervenient entities (i.e., ones that are not in identity relations with strictly physical entities) must be epiphenomenal. The third section presents the general features of another identity-independent attempt to characterize physicalism, namely realization physicalism. According to this view, tokens of prima facie non-physical types are realized by tokens of strictly physical types performing functional roles that specify the nature of the former. The third section also shows how realization physicalism deals with the objections that make physicalist supervenience claims inadequate for characterizing physicalism.

Highlights

  • Physicalism states that everything there is physical

  • The present paper investigates the prospects of some identity-independent attempts to characterize physicalism4

  • Three reasons are given in support of this claim: their compatibility with forms of dualism; the fact that the supervenience relation is left unexplained; and Kim’s causal exclusion argument, which asserts that merely supervenient entities must be epiphenomenal

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Physicalism states that everything there is physical. a lot of things do not seem to be physical. Type-physicalism asserts that all types of mental states (or prima facie non-physical entities) are identical to physical types. The claim that all tokens of a determinate mental state type must be identical to tokens of a determinate physical type makes type-physicalism a strong and contentious thesis. Tokenphysicalism postulates identity relations between the strictly physical and the prima facie non-physical These identities are said to hold between individual tokens, and not whole types. The third section presents the general features of another identity-independent attempt to characterize physicalism, namely realization physicalism. According to this view, tokens of prima facie non-physical types are realized by tokens of strictly physical types performing the functional roles that specify the prima facie non-physical types. The section reveals how realization physicalism solves problems that make supervenience-based attempts to characterize physicalism unattractive

Apparent incompatibility with a physicalist slogan
Supervenience-based attempts to characterize physicalism
Realization physicalism
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call