Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||I describe a feature of the debate between Functionalists and Anti-Functionalists in philosophy of mind that I call The Epiphenomenal Trap. I argue that the dialectic is a trap because neither side can resolve the central metaphysical issue as it has been put. That is because the debate typically trades in possible explanations. So long as Functionalists and Anti-Functionalists continue to debate whether functionalist explanations are possible, the central metaphysical issue cannot be resolved|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Joshua Liao (2012). Takotsubo: Octopus Trap. [REVIEW] Journal of Medical Humanities 33 (3):207-208.
Cory D. Wright (2010). Truth, Ramsification, and the Pluralist's Revenge. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (2):265-283.
Roger Sansom (2003). Constraining the Adaptationism Debate. Biology and Philosophy 18 (4):493-512.
Jaegwon Kim (1984). Epiphenomenal and Supervenient Causation. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 9 (1):257-70.
Matthew Schlesinger (2001). Reexamining Visual Cognition in Human Infants: On the Necessity of Representation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5):1003-1004.
Frank Jackson (1982). Epiphenomenal Qualia. Philosophical Quarterly 32 (April):127-136.
Joachim L. Dagg (2011). Exploring Mouse Trap History. Evolution Education and Outreach 4 (3):397-414.
Carl Gillett (2007). A Mechanist Manifesto for the Philosophy of Mind: A Third Way for Functionalists. Journal of Philosophical Research 32:21-42.
Christopher D. Green (1998). The Thoroughly Modern Aristotle: Was He Really a Functionalist? [Journal (on-Line/Unpaginated)].
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads26 ( #53,672 of 739,357 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,357 )
How can I increase my downloads?