Interactionism for the discerning mind?

Jaegwon Kim has developed an argument that interactionist dualists cannot account for the causal relations between minds and brains. This paper develops a closely related argument that focuses instead on the causal relations between minds and neurons. While there are several promising responses to K...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophical Studies Vol. 177; no. 4; pp. 931 - 947
Autor principal: Shiller, Derek
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Apr2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=142084038&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 142084038
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318116
        4L8
      jtl: Philosophical Studies
      issn: 00318116
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Apr2020
      vid: 177
      iid: 4
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        142084038
        10.1007/s11098-018-1213-5
      ppf: 931
      ppct: 16
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 394KB
      tig:
        atl: Interactionism for the discerning mind?
      aug:
        au: Shiller, Derek
        affil: Brooklyn, USA
      su:
        Dualism
        Interactionism (Philosophy)
        Causation (Philosophy)
        Mind-brain identity theory
        Neurons
      sug:
        subj:
          Dualism
          Interactionism (Philosophy)
          Causation (Philosophy)
          Mind-brain identity theory
          Neurons
      keyword:
        Interactionism
        Mental causation
        Pairing problem
      ab: Jaegwon Kim has developed an argument that interactionist dualists cannot account for the causal relations between minds and brains. This paper develops a closely related argument that focuses instead on the causal relations between minds and neurons. While there are several promising responses to Kim's argument, their plausibility relies on a relatively simple understanding of mind–brain relations. Once we shift our focus to neurons, these responses lose their appeal. The problem is that even if mind–brain causal pairing can be explained at no great theoretical cost, the complex interactions non-physical minds would need to have with neurons cannot.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Philosophical Studies is a copyright of Springer, 2020. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Philosophical Studies
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2020
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N