The Compatibility of the Structure‐and‐Dynamics Argument and Phenomenal Functionalism about Space

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 99 (4):44-52 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Chalmers argues against physicalism using the premise that no truth about consciousness is deducible a priori from purely structural truths, and later defines what it is for a truth to be structural, which turns out to include spatiotemporal truths. But Chalmers then defines spatiotemporal terms by reference to their role in causing spatiotemporal experiences. Stoljar and Ebbers argue that these definitions allow for the trivial falsification of Chalmers premise about structure and consciousness. I show that this result can be avoided by tweaking the relevant premise, and that this tweak is not ad hoc.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,953

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-06-15

Downloads
6 (#1,483,069)

6 months
3 (#1,045,430)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Luke Roelofs
New York University

Citations of this work

Chalmers v Chalmers.Daniel Stoljar - 2020 - Noûs 54 (2):469-487.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references