David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (4):773-788 (2012)
It has been widely noted that Humean supervenience , according to which everything supervenes on intrinsic properties of point-sized things and the spatiotemporal relations between them, is at odds with the nonlocal character of quantum mechanics, according to which not everything supervenes on intrinsic properties of point-sized things and the spatiotemporal relations between them. In particular, a standard view is that the parts of a composite quantum system instantiate further relations which are not accounted for in Lewis's Humean mosaic. But that suggests a simple solution: Why couldn't Lewis simply add these new relations to the supervenience basis? The aim of this article is to use Humean supervenience as a foil to spell out a feature of entanglement of general metaphysical interest: The way in which the metaphysical lessons drawn for two-party systems ramify when systems of many parties are considered. The main conclusion is that the proposed simple fix in fact results in a supervenience thesis different in kind from Lewis's, by making the relations in the supervenience basis global in a certain sense
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
David Lewis (1994). Humean Supervenience Debugged. Mind 103 (412):473--490.
Joseph Melia (1992). A Note on Lewis's Ontology. Analysis 52 (3):191--192.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
George Darby (2009). Lewis's Worldmate Relation and the Apparent Failure of Humean Supervenience. Dialectica 63 (2):195-204.
Vassilios Karakostas (2008). Humean Supervenience in the Light of Contemporary Science. Metaphysica 10 (1):1-26.
Michael Esfeld (1999). Physicalism and Ontological Holism. Metaphilosophy 30 (4):319-337.
David Lewis (1994). Humean Supervenience Debugged. Mind 103 (412):473-490.
Robert Poczobut (2000). Superweniencja. Zarys problematyki. Filozofia Nauki 2.
Michael Esfeld (2003). Do Relations Require Underlying Intrinsic Properties? A Physical Argument for a Metaphysics of Relations. Metaphysica: International Journal for Ontology and Metaphysics 4 (1):5-25.
G. Oppy (2000). "Humean" Supervenience? Philosophical Studies 101 (1):77-105.
Daniel Nolan (2003). Reality and Humean Supervenience: Essays on the Philosophy of David Lewis. [REVIEW] Philosophical Review 112 (2):263-266.
John Earman & John T. Roberts (2005). Contact with the Nomic: A Challenge for Deniers of Humean Supervenience About Laws of Nature Part I: Humean Supervenience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (1):1–22.
Troy Cross (2012). Goodbye, Humean Supervenience. Oxford Studies in Metaphysics 7:129-153.
Andrea Borghini & Giorgio Lando (2011). Natural Properties, Supervenience, and Composition. Humana.Mente 19:79-104.
Ryan J. Wasserman (2005). Humean Supervenience and Personal Identity. Philosophical Quarterly 55 (221):582-593.
Added to index2012-02-05
Total downloads59 ( #33,091 of 1,692,696 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #22,472 of 1,692,696 )
How can I increase my downloads?