Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Physical constitutive principles are far more lenient tha... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Consciousness & Mind
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The asymmetry between mental and physical explanation is accounted for by the greater leniency of physical constitutive principles, not by rationality's uncodifiability

    Physical constitutive principles are far more lenient than rationality, allowing for a greater variety of empirical content

    Consciousness & Mind
    ?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.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Consciousness & Mind

    Connections

    1 topic

    Causation2 linked

    Related

    The asymmetry between mental and physical explanation is accounted for by the gr...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Consciousness & Mind
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    This asymmetry point is entirely separable from McDowell's distinctive claim tha...
    This leniency accounts for an important asymmetry between mental and physical ex...

    Similar

    Davidson holds that there are constitutive a priori principles underly...81%McDowell's reasoning has failed to distinguish constitutive principles...81%McDowell's reasoning relies on constitutive principles being resistant...81%The asymmetry between mental and physical explanation is accounted for...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: anomalous-monism
    View source passageHide passage
    If, however, the emphasis here falls on constitutive principles in particular—as surely it must—then two other problems arise. First, McDowell’s reasoning doesn’t tell us what exactly it is about such principles that makes them resistant to reduction, since, as we’ve just seen, that reasoning has failed to distinguish them from empirical concepts in the physical sciences. And second, as noted in 4.2, Davidson holds that there are constitutive a priori principles underlying the physical science

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective