Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Beyond ReductionPhilosophy of Mind and Post-Reductionist Philosophy of Science$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Steven Horst

Print publication date: 2007

Print ISBN-13: 9780195317114

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2007

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195317114.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 18 April 2019

The Explanatory Gap and Dualism Reconsidered

The Explanatory Gap and Dualism Reconsidered

Chapter:
(p.83) 5 The Explanatory Gap and Dualism Reconsidered
Source:
Beyond Reduction
Author(s):

Steven Horst (Contributor Webpage)

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195317114.003.0006

This chapter examines the implications of post‐reductionist philosophy of science for dualism and the status of the explanatory gaps. The primary argument for dualism is based on a Negative Explanation‐to‐Metaphysics Connection Principle (“Negative EMC”), to the effect that if A is not reducible to B, then B→A is not metaphysically necessary and A is not metaphysically supervenient upon B. But if other special sciences are not reducible to physics either, the dualist is faced with a dilemma. Either she must give up Negative EMC, and with it the principal argument for dualism, or she must draw similar conclusions with respect to other irreducible phenomena, the result being not a dualism but a pluralism of higher ordinality. Dualism can be reconciled with explanatory pluralism only by producing a reason to think that only the mind‐body gap implies a failure of supervenience.

Keywords:   dualism, Negative Explanation‐to‐Metaphysics Connection Principle, pluralism, irreducibility, explanatory gap

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .