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.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 44-52 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Pacific Philosophical Quarterly |
| Volume | 99 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Apr 2018 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The Compatibility of the Structure-and-Dynamics Argument and Phenomenal Functionalism about Space'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver