David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ratio 17 (1):60-67 (2004)
Brian Loar believes he has refuted all those antiphysicalist arguments that take as their point of departure observations about what is or isn't conceivable. I argue that there remains an important, popular and plausible-looking form of conceivability argument that Loar has entirely overlooked. Though he may not have realized it, Saul Kripke presents, or comes close to presenting, two fundamentally different forms of conceivability argument. I distinguish the two arguments and point out that while Loar has succeeded in refuting one of Kripke's arguments he has not refuted the other. Loar is mistaken: physicalism still faces an apparently insurmountable conceptual obstacle
|Keywords||Conceivability Metaphysics Pain Physicalism Kripke, S Loar, B|
|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
Brendan O'Sullivan & Peter Hanks (2008). Conceiving of Pain. Dialogue 47 (02):351-.
James Tartaglia (2013). Conceptualizing Physical Consciousness. Philosophical Psychology 26 (6):817-838.
Similar books and articles
Philip Goff (2011). A Posteriori Physicalists Get Our Phenomenal Concepts Wrong. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (2):191 - 209.
Martin Rechenauer (1997). Individualism, Individuation and That-Clauses. Erkenntnis 46 (1):49-67.
Brian Loar (1992). Elimination Versus Nonreductive Physicalism. In David Charles & Kathleen Lennon (eds.), Reduction, Explanation and Realism. Oxford University Press.
Daniel Stoljar (2007). Two Conceivability Arguments Compared. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 107 (1pt1):27-44.
Don A. Merrell (2005). Token Physicalism is Not Immune to Kripke's Essentialist Anti-Physicalist Argument. Philosophia 32 (1-4):383-388.
Jesper Kallestrup (2006). Physicalism, Conceivability and Strong Necessities. Synthese 151 (2):273-295.
Brian Loar (2003). Qualia, Properties, Modality. Philosophical Issues 1 (1):113-29.
Jerry Fodor (1982). A Reply to Brian Loar's "Must Beliefs Be Sentences?". PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:644 - 653.
Daniel Stoljar (2001). The Conceivability Argument and Two Conceptions of the Physical. Philosophical Perspectives 15 (s15):393-413.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads61 ( #27,391 of 1,102,053 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #52,490 of 1,102,053 )
How can I increase my downloads?