Why Jaegwon Kim’s Physicalism is Not Near Enough: An Implicit Argument for a non-Cartesian Interactionism (Part I)
NeuroQuantology September 16, 2010 David Scharf 1 citation
Kim’s argument for a minimal physicalism breaks down in two critical places. First, his functional reduction of cognitive/intentional properties fails to do justice to what we mean when we refer to belief, desire and the like, because it fails to account for their referential and normative content. And although Kim believes that he is saving what is distinctive about our cognitive/intentional...