The myth of the myth of supervenience

Philosophical Studies:1-23 (forthcoming)
Authors
David Mark Kovacs
Tel Aviv University
Abstract
Supervenience is necessary co-variation between two sets of entities. In the good old days, supervenience was considered a useful philosophical tool with a wide range of applications in the philosophy of mind, metaethics, epistemology, and elsewhere. In recent years, however, supervenience has fallen out of favor, giving place to grounding, realization, and other, more metaphysically “meaty”, notions. The emerging consensus is that there are principled reasons for which explanatory theses cannot be captured in terms of supervenience, or as the slogan goes: “Supervenience Is Nonexplanatory”. While SIN is widely endorsed, it is far from clear what it amounts to and why we should believe it. In this paper, I will distinguish various theses that could be meant by it, and will argue that none of them is both interesting and plausible: on some interpretations of ‘explanatory’, we have no reason to believe that supervenience is unexplanatory, while on other interpretations, supervenience is indeed unexplanatory, but widely accepted textbook cases of explanatory relations come out as unexplanatory, too. This result raises doubts as to whether there is any interesting sense in which SIN is true, and suggests that the contemporary consensus about supervenience is mistaken.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11098-018-1106-7
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: 38,113
External links

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

Grounding: Toward a Theory of the In-Virtue-Of Relation.Paul Audi - 2012 - Journal of Philosophy 109 (12):685-711.
New Work for a Theory of Universals.David Lewis - 1983 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 61 (4):343-377.
The Possibility of Physicalism.Shamik Dasgupta - 2014 - Journal of Philosophy 111 (9-10):557-592.
Metaphysical Dependence: Grounding and Reduction.Gideon Rosen - 2010 - In Bob Hale & Aviv Hoffmann (eds.), Modality: Metaphysics, Logic, and Epistemology. Oxford University Press. pp. 109-36.
Against Grounding Necessitarianism.Alexander Skiles - 2015 - Erkenntnis 80 (4):717-751.

View all 59 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Varieties of Supervenience.Robert Stalnaker - 1996 - Philosophical Perspectives 10:221-42.
The Myth of Supervenience.Thomas Grimes - 1988 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 69 (June):152-60.
Concepts of Supervenience Revisited.Oron Shagrir - 2013 - Erkenntnis 78 (2):469-485.
Supervenience, Necessary Coextensions, and Reducibility.John Bacon - 1986 - Philosophical Studies 49 (March):163-76.
Varieties of Supervenience.Brian P. McLaughlin - 1995 - In Elias E. Savellos & U. Yalcin (eds.), Supervenience: New Essays. Cambridge University Press. pp. 16--59.
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.
'Strong' and 'Global' Supervenience Revisited.Jaegwon Kim - 1987 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 48 (December):315-26.
Concepts of Supervenience.Jaegwon Kim - 1984 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 45 (December):153-76.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-05-07

Total views
37 ( #185,457 of 2,313,603 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
11 ( #61,428 of 2,313,603 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature