How Physicalists Can—and Cannot—Explain the Seeming “Absurdity” of Physicalism

Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 97 (3):681-703 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to a widely held physicalist view, consciousness is identical with some physical or functional phenomenon just as liquidity is identical with loose molecular connection. To many of us, this claim about consciousness seems more problematic than the claim about liquidity. To many—including many physicalists—the identification of consciousness with some physical phenomenon even seems “absurd” or “crazy”. A full defence of physicalism should explain why the allegedly correct hypothesis comes across this way. If physicalism is true and we have reason to accept it, why does it seem “absurd”? One possibility is that this is fully explained by the fact that we have an erroneous understanding of consciousness or its physical basis. This explanation is embraced by few if any physicalists. It is rejected by many, including proponents of the “phenomenal concept strategy”, which lately has become the dominant strategy for defending physicalism. But the “error explanation” is clearly the most plausible explanation that is available to physicalists. So this paper argues.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,410

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Papineau on Phenomenal Concepts. [REVIEW]Tim Crane - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (1):155-162.
Conceptualizing physical consciousness.James Tartaglia - 2013 - Philosophical Psychology 26 (6):817-838.
The Epistemic/Ontic Divide.Barbara Montero - 2003 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (2):404-418.
The Mental Causation Debate.Tim Crane - 1995 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 69 (Supplementary):211-36.
Revelation and Physicalism.Nic Damnjanovic - 2012 - Dialectica 66 (1):69-91.
Supervenience and neuroscience.Pete Mandik - 2011 - Synthese 180 (3):443 - 463.
Do phenomenal concepts misrepresent?Darragh Byrne - 2016 - Philosophical Psychology 29 (5):669-678.
Physicalists Have Nothing to Fear from Ghosts.Greg Janzen - 2012 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (1):91-104.
A posteriori physicalists get our phenomenal concepts wrong.Philip Goff - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (2):191 - 209.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-03-25

Downloads
128 (#143,664)

6 months
15 (#173,898)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Pär Sundström
Umeå University

Citations of this work

The fragmentation of phenomenal character.Neil Mehta - 2021 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 104 (1):209-231.
Revelation and the intuition of dualism.Michelle Liu - 2021 - Synthese 199 (3-4):11491-11515.
Phenomenal, Normative, and Other Explanatory Gaps: A General Diagnosis.Neil Mehta - 2017 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 98 (3):567-591.
The inexorability of immortality: no need for God?Anna Smajdor - 2021 - Norsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 56 (1):19-30.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1974 - Philosophical Review 83 (October):435-50.
Epiphenomenal qualia.Frank Jackson - 1982 - Philosophical Quarterly 32 (April):127-136.
Mental Files.François Récanati - 2012 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1979 - In Mortal questions. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 435 - 450.
Psychophysical and theoretical identifications.David K. Lewis - 1972 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 50 (3):249-258.

View all 79 references / Add more references