Thanks for reminding me about Chalmers' blog post about this -- hilarious! I found the comments section enjoyable, too -- especially (i) Chalmers' comment exhorting others not to conflate *physicalism* or materialism with *naturalism* (as most property dualists are yet naturalists), and (ii) his expressed sympathies with neutral monism. It's nice when the most famous philosopher of mind agrees with you (or rather, you with him!). :-)
Jaegwon Kim does defend a type of dualism, but I don't think its anywhere near substance dualism. I find it very noble of him to be able to rethink his position openly.
4 comments:
Thanks for reminding me about Chalmers' blog post about this -- hilarious! I found the comments section enjoyable, too -- especially (i) Chalmers' comment exhorting others not to conflate *physicalism* or materialism with *naturalism* (as most property dualists are yet naturalists), and (ii) his expressed sympathies with neutral monism. It's nice when the most famous philosopher of mind agrees with you (or rather, you with him!). :-)
Oi!
No hat tip? ;-)
Sorry Stunney. You had put a good deal of this in your comment line, and I decided it ought to be put into the main entry.
Jaegwon Kim does defend a type of dualism, but I don't think its anywhere near substance dualism.
I find it very noble of him to be able to rethink his position openly.
Post a Comment