The Supervenience Argument, Overdetermination, and Causal Drainage: Assessing Kim's Master Argument

Autor(en): Walter, Sven 
Stichwörter: Causal Drainage; Causal Exclusion; Ethics; Jaegwon Kim; Mental Causation; METAPHYSICS; Overdetermination; Psychology; Psychology, Multidisciplinary; Social Sciences - Other Topics; Supervenience Argument
Erscheinungsdatum: 2008
Herausgeber: ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
Journal: PHILOSOPHICAL PSYCHOLOGY
Volumen: 21
Ausgabe: 5
Startseite: 673
Seitenende: 696
Zusammenfassung: 
This paper examines Jaegwon Kim's Supervenience Argument ( SA) against nonreductive physicalism, concentrating on Kim's response to two of the most important objections against the SA: First, the Overdetermination Argument, according to which Kim has no convincing argument against the possibility that mental causation might be a case of genuine or systematic overdetermination; second, the Generalization Argument, according to which the SA would entail that causation at any level gives way to causation at the next lower level, thereby leading to an untenable all-encompassing epiphenomenalism. It is argued that as of yet, Kim has failed to develop a coherent overall position, since various moves he makes in response to these criticisms are strangely at odds with other parts of his philosophical position.
ISSN: 09515089
DOI: 10.1080/09515080802415985

Show full item record

Page view(s)

2
Last Week
0
Last month
0
checked on Mar 3, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric