Skip to main content
×
Home

Physical-Effect Epiphenomenalism and Common Underlying Causes

  • DWAYNE MOORE (a1)
Abstract

Qualia epiphenomenalism is the view that qualitative properties of events, such as the raw feel of tastes or painfulness, lack causal efficacy. One common objection to qualia epiphenomenalism is the epistemic argument, which states that this loss of causal efficacy undermines our capacity to know about these epiphenomenal qualitative properties (Sterjnberg, 1999; Watkins, 1989). A number of rejoinders have been offered up to insulate qualia epiphenomenalism from the epistemic argument. In this paper I consider and ultimately reject two such replies, namely, the common underlying cause reply and the appeal to physical-effect epiphenomenalism.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Antony L. 1989Anomalous Monism and the Problem of Explanatory Force”, Philosophical Review 98: 153–87.
Armstrong D. 1978 A Theory of Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bailey A. 2006Zombies, Epiphenomenalism and Physicalist Theories of Consciousness”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 36, 4: 481510.
Bennett K. 2003Why the Exclusion Problem Seems Intractable, and How, Just Maybe, to Tract it”, Noûs 37: 471497.
Bieri P. 1992Trying Out EpiphenomenalismErkenntnis 36: 283309.
Brewer B. 1995Mental Causation: Compulsion by Reason”, Aristotelian Society Supplementary 69: 237253.
Broad C. 1959 The Philosophy of C. D. Broad. Schilpp P. (ed.) Tudor Publishing.
Burge T. 1993Mind Body Causation and Explanation”, Mental Causation, Heil J. and Mele A. (eds.) Oxford: Clarendon Press: 97120.
Butler J. 2011Introspective Knowledge of Experience and Its Role in Consciousness Studies”, Journal of Consciousness Studies 18, 2: 128145.
Campbell N. 2003An Inconsistency in the Knowledge Argument”, Erkenntnis 58: 261–66.
Campbell N. 2011Reply to Nagasawa on the Inconsistency Objection to the Knowledge Argument”, Erkenntnis online first.
Cavedon-Taylor D. 2008Still Epiphenominal Qualia”, Philosophia 37, 1: 105107.
Chalmers D. 1996 The Conscious Mind, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chalmers D. 2003The Content and Epistemology of Phenomenal Belief”, Consciousness: New Philosophical Perspectives, Smith Q. and Jokic A. (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press: 220272.
Dancy J. 1985 An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Dennett D. 1978Current Issues in the Philosophy of Mind”, American Philosophical Quarterly 15: 249261
Dennett D. 1991 Consciousness Explained. Little, Brown and Company: Boston.
Dretske F. 1988 Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes, Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Fodor J. 1987 Psychosemantics, Cambridge: The MIT Press
Fodor J. 1989Making Mind Matter More”, Philosophical Topics 17, 1: 5979.
Fricker E. 1993The Threat of Eliminativism”, Mind and Language 8, 2: 254281.
Hutto D. 1999A Cause For Concern”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59, 2: 381401.
Gadenne V. 2006In Defense of Qualia Epiphenomenalism”, Journal of Consciousness Studies 13, 1-2: 101114.
Gertler B. 2001Introspecting Phenomenal States”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63, 2: 305328.
Horgan T. 1987Supervenient Qualia”, Philosophical Review 96: 491520.
Hyslop A. 1998Methodological EpiphenomenalismAustralasian Journal of Philosophy 76, 1: 6170.
Jackson F. 1982Epiphenomenal Qualia”, Philosophical Quarterly 32: 127–36.
Jackson F. 1986What Mary Didn’t Know”. The Journal of Philosophy 83: 291295.
Kirk R. 2008The Inconceivability of Zombies”, Philosophical Studies 139: 7389.
Kim J. 2005 Physicalism, or Something Near Enough. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Loewer B. 2002Comments on Jaegwon Kim’s Mind and the Physical World”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65: 655662.
Martin M. 1993The Rational Role of Experience”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series 93: 7188.
McLaughlin B. 1994Epiphenomenalism”, A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind, Guttenplan S. (ed.). Oxford: Blackwell: 277288.
Medlin B. 1967Ryle and the Mechanical Hypothesis” in Presley C. F. (ed.), The Identity Theory of Mind. (Brisbane: University of Queensland Press: 110-111.
Muller H. 2008Why Qualia are Not Epiphenomenal”, Ratio 21: 8590.
Muller H. 2009More Troubles for EpiphenomenalismPhilosophia 37: 109112
Nagasawa Y. 2010The Knowledge Argument and Epiphenomenalism”, Erkenntnis 72: 3756.
Pauen M. 2000Painless Pain: Property Dualism and the Causal Role of Phenomenal Consciousness”, American Philosophical Quarterly 37: 5164.
Pauen M. 2006Feeling Causes”, Journal of Consciousness Studies 13, 1: 129152.
Place U. T. 1988Thirty Years On—Is Consciousness Still a Brain Process”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 66, 2: 208219.
Pritchard D. 2005 Epistemic Luck. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Robinson W. 2004 Understanding Phenomenal Consciousness, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson W. 2006Knowing Epiphenomena”, Journal of Consciousness Studies 13, 1-2: 85100.
Robinson W. 2011Epiphenomenalism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Zalta E. (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epiphenomenalism/#SelStu
Searle J. 2003 The Rediscovery of the Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Staudacher A. 2006Epistemological Challenges to Qualia-Epiphenomenalism”, Journal of Consciousness Studies 13, 1: 153175.
Swinburne R. 2011Could Anyone Justifiably Believe Epiphenomenalism?Journal of Consciousness Studies 18, 3-4: 196216.
Stjernberg F. 1999 “Not So Epiphenomenal Qualia”, http://www.lucs.lu.se/spinning/categories/language/Stjernberg/index.html.
Tammelleo S. 2008A Limited Defense of Epiphenomenalism”, South African Journal of Philosophy 27: 4051
Walter S. 2007Epiphenomenalism”. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fieser James and Dowden Bradley (eds.), http://www.iep.utm.edu/epipheno/
Watkins M. 1989The Knowledge Argument Against the Knowledge Argument”, Analysis 49: 158–60
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie
  • ISSN: 0012-2173
  • EISSN: 1759-0949
  • URL: /core/journals/dialogue-canadian-philosophical-review-revue-canadienne-de-philosophie
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 6
Total number of PDF views: 22 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 142 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 14th December 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.