David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Mind 107 (428):841-843 (1998)
Trenton Merricks argues against the following doctrine: Microphysical Supervenience (MS) Necessarily, if atoms A1 through An compose an object that exemplifies intrinsic qualitative properties Q1 through Qn, then atoms like A1 through An (in all their respective intrinsic qualitative properties), related to one another by all the same restricted atom-to-atom relations as A1 through An, compose an object that exemplifies Q1 through Qn. (Merricks 1998, p. 59) Imagine a person, _P_. Microphysical Supervenience entails that there is an object, the finger-complement, wholly composed of all of _P_'s atoms except those in _P_'s left index-finger. After all, when we slice off _P_'s finger, we leave atoms micro- indiscernible from those in the finger-complement, and _those_ atoms compose an object, maimed _P_. Moreover, if _being conscious_ is an intrinsic property, then Microphysical Supervenience entails that the finger-complement is conscious, for maimed _P_ is conscious. But this, argues Merricks, is "simply incredible". It cannot be the case that every large collection of _P_'s atoms forms a conscious object, for then there would be "a mighty host" of conscious objects sitting in _P_'s chair (Merricks 1998, p.63). Even if there is a finger-complement, it is not conscious. So _being_ _conscious_ does not supervene upon microphysical arrangements: if _being conscious_ is an intrinsic qualitative property then Microphysical Supervenience is false. Merricks argues that _being conscious_ is indeed intrinsic, and thus that Microphysical Supervenience _is_ false. He has two reasons for supposing _being conscious_ to be intrinsic, and I object to both of these
|Keywords||Consciousness Intrinsic Metaphysics Supervenience Merricks, T|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Cody Gilmore (2010). Sider, The Inheritance of Intrinsicality, and Theories of Composition. Philosophical Studies 151 (2):177-197.
Similar books and articles
Harold W. Noonan (1999). Identity, Constitution and Microphysical Supervenience. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 99 (3):273-288.
Dale Dorsey (2012). Intrinsic Value and the Supervenience Principle. Philosophical Studies 157 (2):267-285.
K. Hawley (1998). Discussion. Merricks on Whether Being Conscious is Intrinsic. Mind 107 (428):841-844.
Peter Forrest (1988). Supervenience: The Grand-Property Hypothesis. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 66 (March):1-12.
Terence E. Horgan (1982). Supervenience and Microphysics. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 63 (January):29-43.
Harold W. Noonan (1999). Microphysical Supervenience and Consciousness. Mind 108 (432):755-9.
Michael Rea (1997). Supervenience and Co-Location. American Philosophical Quarterly 34 (3):367 - 375.
Trenton Merricks (1998). On Whether Being Conscious is Intrinsic. Mind 107 (428):845-846.
Theodore Sider (2003). Maximality and Microphysical Supervenience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (1):139-149.
Trenton Merricks (1998). Against the Doctrine of Microphysical Supervenience. Mind 107 (425):59-71.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads78 ( #18,661 of 1,100,143 )
Recent downloads (6 months)28 ( #6,578 of 1,100,143 )
How can I increase my downloads?