|Abstract||What is the relation between weak and strong supervenience? Kim claims that weak supervenience is weaker, that it fails to entail strong supervenience. But he mistakenly infers this in virtue of logical form. In fact, one line of reasoning suggests weak supervenience _does_ entail strong. Following this line, we see that weak and strong supervenience.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Oron Shagrir (2002). Global Supervenience, Coincident Entities, and Anti-Individualism. Philosophical Studies 109 (2):171-96.
Xiaoping Chen (2011). Various Concepts of “Supervenience” and Their Relations: A Comment on Kim's Theory of Supervenience. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 6 (2):316-333.
Jaegwon Kim (1984). Concepts of Supervenience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 45 (December):153-76.
William E. Seager (1988). Weak Supervenience and Materialism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 48 (June):697-709.
Simon W. Blackburn (1984). Supervenience Revisited. In Ian Hacking (ed.), Exercises in Analysis: Essays by Students of Casimir Lewy. Cambridge University Press.
Brian P. McLaughlin (1995). Varieties of Supervenience. In Elias E. Savellos & U. Yalcin (eds.), Supervenience: New Essays. Cambridge University Press.
Oron Shagrir (2009). Strong Global Supervenience is Valuable. Erkenntnis 71 (3):417 - 423.
Brian P. McLaughlin (1994). Varieties of Supervenience. In Savellos, E.; Yalchin, O. (Eds.) Supervenience.
Mark Moyer (2008). Weak and Global Supervenience Are Strong. Philosophical Studies 138 (1):125 - 150.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #60,181 of 722,914 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,917 of 722,914 )
How can I increase my downloads?