Supervenience and explanatory exclusion

This paper argues that there is an inconsistency between Jaegwon Kim's earlier work on supervenience and his more recent work explanatory exclusion. In this work on supervenience Kim advocates an explanatory agnosticism that, by the time of his later work, is replaced by an endorsement of reductive explanation. My argument is that this tension between Kim's early and later work is unfortunate since explanatory exclusion in highly questionable in its own right and is not reconcilable with his.