Why property dualists must reject substance physicalism

被引:0
|
作者
Susan Schneider
机构
[1] University of Pennsylvania,Department of Philosophy
来源
Philosophical Studies | 2012年 / 157卷
关键词
Property dualism; David Chalmers; Jaegwon Kim; Qualia; Substance dualism; Substance; Mind; Non-reductive physicalism; Consciousness; Bundle theory; Substratum theory; Physicalism; Materialism;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
I argue that property dualists cannot hold that minds are physical substances. The focus of my discussion is a property dualism that takes qualia to be sui generis features of reality.
引用
收藏
页码:61 / 76
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Why property dualists must reject substance physicalism
    Schneider, Susan
    [J]. PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES, 2012, 157 (01) : 61 - 76
  • [2] Should property-dualists be substance-hylomorphists?
    Barnes, G
    [J]. PERSON, SOUL, AND IMMORTALITY, PROCEEDINGS, 2001, 75 : 285 - 299
  • [3] Why realists must reject normative quietism
    Wodak, Daniel
    [J]. PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES, 2017, 174 (11) : 2795 - 2817
  • [4] Why realists must reject normative quietism
    Daniel Wodak
    [J]. Philosophical Studies, 2017, 174 : 2795 - 2817
  • [5] Ontological physicalism and property pluralism: Why they are incompatible
    Francescotti, R
    [J]. PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY, 2000, 81 (04): : 349 - 362
  • [6] Why libertarians should reject full private property rights
    Peirce, M
    [J]. PHILOSOPHICAL FORUM, 2001, 32 (01): : 25 - 52
  • [7] Must we reject liberalism?
    Profant, Martin
    [J]. FILOSOFICKY CASOPIS, 2016, 64 (02): : 283 - 289
  • [8] Property dualists shouldn't be nominalists about properties
    Giberman, Daniel
    Mark Kovacs, David
    [J]. INQUIRY-AN INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY, 2024,
  • [9] Property physicalism, reduction and realization
    Beckermann, A
    [J]. MINDSCAPES: PHILOSOPHY, SCIENCE, AND THE MIND, 1997, 5 : 303 - 321
  • [10] MUST PHYSICALISM IMPLY THE SUPERVENIENCE OF THE MENTAL ON THE PHYSICAL?
    Montero, Barbara Gail
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY, 2013, 110 (02): : 93 - 110