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
    The interaction principle does not assume monism — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Consciousness & Mind
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The interaction principle does not assume monism

    CausationConsciousness & Mind
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Davidson is attempting to derive monism from the interaction principle and other principles
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Principles used to derive monism must themselves be neutral about the metaphysics of mind
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Assuming the conclusion (monism) in a premise would be circular reasoning
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The interaction principle presupposes that mental and physical events share a causal-nomological framework, which already implies ontological continuity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ontological continuity between mental and physical relata is a distinctly monist commitment, not a metaphysically neutral starting point.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Thus the interaction principle smuggles in monism by requiring that causally related events belong to a single ontological order.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Jaegwon Kim argues that Davidson's causal relata are individuated by their physical descriptions, embedding a physical ontology into the principle's structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A principle whose application conditions presuppose physical token-identity cannot be treated as neutral between dualist and monist interpretations of mind-body causation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Consciousness & MindCausation

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge2 linked

    Related

    A principle whose application conditions presuppose physical token-identity cann...Assuming the conclusion (monism) in a premise would be circular reasoningDavidson is attempting to derive monism from the interaction principle and other...Jaegwon Kim argues that Davidson's causal relata are individuated by their physi...
    +4 moreShow less
    Ontological continuity between mental and physical relata is a distinctly monist...Principles used to derive monism must themselves be neutral about the metaphysic...The interaction principle presupposes that mental and physical events share a ca...Thus the interaction principle smuggles in monism by requiring that causally rel...

    Similar

    Davidson is attempting to derive monism from the interaction principle92%Davidson is attempting to derive monism from the interaction principle...90%The 'because' argument does not establish the interaction principle80%The interaction principle requires that mental events causally interac...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: anomalous-monism
    View source passageHide passage
    This point is important when one considers the wider framework to which the interaction principle contributes. Since Davidson is attempting to derive monism from it and other principles that are themselves neutral about the metaphysics of mind, he cannot assume that action is (identical with) behavior on pain of circularity. Once monism has been established, Davidson will be in a position to deploy the ‘because’ point in order to argue for the claim that mental events are causally efficacious wi
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit