Physicalism, the thesis that everything is physical, is one of the most controversial problems in philosophy. Its adherents argue that there is no more important doctrine in philosophy, whilst its opponents claim that its role is greatly exaggerated. In this superb introduction to the problem Daniel Stoljar focuses on three fundamental questions: the interpretation, truth and p...
Physicalism, the thesis that everything is physical, is one of the most controversial problems in philosophy. Its adherents argue that there is no more important doctrine in philosophy, whilst its opponents claim that its role is greatly exaggerated. In this superb introduction to the problem Daniel Stoljar focuses on three fundamental questions: the interpretation, truth and philosophical significance of physicalism. In answering these questions he covers the following key topics: a brief history of physicalism and its definitions what a physical property is and how physicalism meets challenges from empirical sciences 'Hempel,s dilemma, and the relationship between physicalism and physics physicalism and key debates in metaphysics and philosophy of mind, such as supervenience, identity and conceivability physicalism and causality. Additional features include chapter summaries, annotated further reading and a glossary of technical terms, making Physicalism ideal for those coming to the problem for the first time.
Our interest so far has been not in whether physicalism is true but in what it is; it is very natural to pursue that interest using a modal framework as our dilemma does. (查看原文)
1 有用 Walt 2023-05-05 19:32:23 福建
这本书的重点不是讨论物理主义【对不对】 而是讨论物理主义【是什么】 这是理解这本书的关键 然而尴尬的是论证步骤中蕴含了太多未加检验的预设 虽然最终 他的目的或许达到了 但这个过程其实和哲学没什么关系 仅仅是检验了一个当代哲学讨论中常常被碰到的概念罢了 最后 最关键的存在论问题根本没有得到澄清 这一点硬伤太致命
2 有用 哲理庐 2019-08-10 03:25:22
看了他对Hempel’s dilemma的回应，直接吐了。我代替老爷子回应一下：1. 你那个莫名其妙的twin-world我不知道是啥，如果它是所谓的平行世界，那我的ideal physical theory就要在定义上包括对它的描述，所以我的那个前提没被击倒。2. 当然你肯定会像Kripke那样耍流氓说那不是一个平行世界，那你就都跟我说清楚那是什么嘛！当然你肯定不会说清楚，因为模糊才可以继续混嘛... 看了他对Hempel’s dilemma的回应，直接吐了。我代替老爷子回应一下：1. 你那个莫名其妙的twin-world我不知道是啥，如果它是所谓的平行世界，那我的ideal physical theory就要在定义上包括对它的描述，所以我的那个前提没被击倒。2. 当然你肯定会像Kripke那样耍流氓说那不是一个平行世界，那你就都跟我说清楚那是什么嘛！当然你肯定不会说清楚，因为模糊才可以继续混嘛！ 最后，我记得这个作者在SEP词条中写过这么一句，“由于大环境的缘故，现在为物理主义辩护很容易”，这意思难道是我们就要为物理主义辩护了？我怎么有一种人类理性被侮辱的感觉。 (展开)
0 有用 sonatanegra 2019-02-01 23:19:32
无知的人类你们对physicalism一无所知...
0 有用 一块蓝石头 2018-06-07 15:30:49
现在似乎不想给五星了，2017/6/8 五星，2018/6/7 四星
0 有用 丁白 2025-02-09 12:09:37 广东
补标。读此书可以理解一些当代哲学争论是多么trivial和垃圾（并不是全部 我个人认为哲学逻辑就好得多）。一个最幽默的物理主义版本是：一个事物是物理的，当且仅当它是理想物理理论描述的对象（理想物理理论是物理理论的理想极限）。真的把我看😆了，你们物理主义真的研究过当代物理吗…