David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 109 (2):171-96 (2002)
Theodore Sider distinguishes two notions of global supervenience: strong global supervenience and weak global supervenience. He then discusses some applications to general metaphysical questions. Most interestingly, Sider employs the weak notion in order to undermine a familiar argument against coincident distinct entities. In what follows, I reexamine the two notions and distinguish them from a third, intermediate, notion (intermediate global supervenience). I argue that (a) weak global supervenience is not an adequate notion of dependence; (b) weak global supervenience does not capture certain assumptions about coincidence relations; (c) these assumptions are better accommodated by the stronger notion of intermediate global supervenience; (d) intermediate global supervenience, however, is also not an adequate notion of dependence; and (e) strong global supervenience is an adequate notion of dependence. It also fits in with anti-individualism about the mental. It does not, however, serve to rebut arguments against coincident entities.
|Keywords||Coincidence Entity Global Individualism Metaphysics Supervenience Sider, 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
Fabrice Correia (2008). Ontological Dependence. Philosophy Compass 3 (5):1013-1032.
L. A. Paul (2006). Coincidence as Overlap. Noûs 40 (4):623–659.
Stephen Kearns & Ofra Magidor (2012). Semantic Sovereignty. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (2):322-350.
Brian Epstein (2009). Ontological Individualism Reconsidered. Synthese 166 (1):187-213.
Theodore Sider (2008). Yet Another Paper on the Supervenience Argument Against Coincident Entities. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 77 (3):613-624.
Similar books and articles
Karen Bennett (2004). Global Supervenience and Dependence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (3):501-529.
Mark Moyer (2008). Weak and Global Supervenience Are Strong. Philosophical Studies 138 (1):125 - 150.
R. Cranston Paull & Theodore Sider (1992). In Defense of Global Supervenience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 52 (4):833-53.
Oron Shagrir (1999). More on Global Supervenience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (3):691-701.
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 (1987). 'Strong' and 'Global' Supervenience Revisited. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 48 (December):315-26.
Oron Shagrir (1999). More on Global Supervenience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (3):691 - 701.
Oron Shagrir (2009). Strong Global Supervenience is Valuable. Erkenntnis 71 (3):417 - 423.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #92,453 of 1,792,926 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #102,277 of 1,792,926 )
How can I increase my downloads?