Graduate studies at Western
In [Book Chapter] (in Press) (2000)
|Abstract||After some preliminary clarifications, arguments for the supposed asymmetry of supervenience and determination, such as they are, are shown to be unsound. An argument against the supposed asymmetry is then constructed and defended against objections. This is followed by explanations of why the intuition of asymmetry is nonetheless so entrenched, and of how the asymmetric ontological priority of the physical over the non-physical can be understood without the supposed asymmetry of supervenience and determination|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jaegwon Kim (1987). 'Strong' and 'Global' Supervenience Revisited. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 48 (December):315-26.
Thomas Gardner (2005). Supervenience Physicalism: Meeting the Demands of Determination and Explanation. Philosophical Papers 34 (2):189-208.
Ausonio Marras (1993). Supervenience and Reducibility: An Odd Couple. Philosophical Quarterly 44 (171):215-222.
Phil Dowe (1992). Process Causality and Asymmetry. Erkenntnis 37 (2):179-196.
John Haugeland (1984). Ontological Supervenience. Southern Journal of Philosophy Supplement 22 (S1):1-12.
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.
Erhan Demircioglu (2011). Supervenience and Reductive Physicalism. European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 7 (1):25-35.
R. Cranston Paull & Theodore Sider (1992). In Defense of Global Supervenience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 52 (4):833-53.
John F. Post (1999). Is Supervenience Asymmetric? Manuscrito 22 (2):305-344.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #142,526 of 741,159 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?