Southern Journal of Philosophy 49 (4):321-346 (2011)

Authors
Jordi Fernandez
University of Adelaide
Suzy Bliss
University of Tasmania
Abstract
We evaluate the scope of Jaegwon Kim's “supervenience argument” for reduction. Does its conclusion apply only to psychology, or does it generalize to all the special sciences? The claim that the supervenience argument generalizes to all the special sciences if it goes through for psychology is often raised as an objection to the supervenience argument. We argue that this objection is ambiguous. We distinguish three readings of it and suggest that some of them make it a plausible claim, whereas other readings make it implausible. We suggest that this ambiguity is the result of picturing the world as being hierarchically organized in levels, with the domain of physics at the bottom and the domains of the social sciences at the top. The plausibility of the objection depends on how we think of this picture. This popular picture, we suggest, involves three different dimensions along which reduction may occur
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2012
DOI 10.1111/j.2041-6962.2011.00080.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 50,268
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Naming and Necessity.Saul Kripke - 1980 - Harvard University Press.
Physicalism, or Something Near Enough.Jaegwon Kim - 2005 - Princeton University Press.

View all 25 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Supervenience Argument Generalizes.Thomas D. Bontly - 2002 - Philosophical Studies 109 (1):75-96.
Kim's Supervenience Argument and the Nature of Total Realizers.Douglas Keaton - 2012 - European Journal of Philosophy 20 (2):243-259.
Causation, Supervenience, and Special Sciences.Graham Macdonald - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (5):631-631.
Concepts of Supervenience.Jaegwon Kim - 1984 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 45 (December):153-76.
Varieties of Supervenience.Brian P. McLaughlin - 1995 - In Elias E. Savellos & U. Yalcin (eds.), Supervenience: New Essays. Cambridge University Press. pp. 16--59.
Explaining Supervenience.Nick Zagwill - 1997 - Journal of Philosophical Research 22:509-518.
“Causation” is Only Part of the Answer.Matthias Scheutz - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (5):634-635.
Supervenience and Reductive Physicalism.Erhan Demircioglu - 2011 - European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 7 (1):25-35.
Varieties of Supervenience.Brian P. McLaughlin - 1994 - In Elias E. Savellos & Ümit D. Yalçin (eds.), Savellos, E.; Yalchin, O. (Eds.) Supervenience. Cambridge University Press. pp. 16--59.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-12-03

Total views
81 ( #113,078 of 2,325,508 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #88,599 of 2,325,508 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes