Jaegwon Kim's exclusion argument demonstrates that irreducibly distinct higher-level frameworks generate systematic overdetermination problems that undermine their explanatory legitimacy.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Exclusion argument(Philosophy of mind and social ontology; attributed to Kim 2005): The argument that supervenient properties are epiphenomenal because all the causal work is done by the base-level properties upon which they supervene.
Jaegwon Kim(as the philosopher being cited for a specific argument): A highly influential Korean-American philosopher who wrote extensively about the mind-body problem—the puzzle of how our thoughts and feelings relate to our physical brains.
explanatory legitimacy(what is undermined by the overdetermination problem): Whether an explanation actually deserves to be considered a real, valid way of understanding why something happened, or whether it's redundant and unnecessary.
irreducibly distinct higher-level frameworks(what Kim argues creates problems): Different ways of explaining the same thing that cannot be simplified down to each other—for example, explaining human behavior using psychology versus chemistry; they're separate 'levels' that seem to do genuinely different explanatory work.

Based on where you are in your exploration