Phenomenal knowledge and phenomenal causality

Noûs Pub Date : 2025-07-05 DOI:10.1111/nous.70002
Lei Zhong
{"title":"Phenomenal knowledge and phenomenal causality","authors":"Lei Zhong","doi":"10.1111/nous.70002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There has been extensive debate over whether we can have phenomenal knowledge in the case of epiphenomenalism. This article aims to bring that debate to a close. I first develop a refined causal account of knowledge—one that is modest enough to avoid various putative problems, yet sufficiently robust to undermine the epiphenomenalist position. I then consider and reject several possible responses that an epiphenomenalist might offer. The discussion thus shows that epiphenomenalist accounts of phenomenal knowledge—such as the third‐factor model and the constitutional model—are ultimately indefensible.","PeriodicalId":501006,"journal":{"name":"Noûs","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Noûs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.70002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There has been extensive debate over whether we can have phenomenal knowledge in the case of epiphenomenalism. This article aims to bring that debate to a close. I first develop a refined causal account of knowledge—one that is modest enough to avoid various putative problems, yet sufficiently robust to undermine the epiphenomenalist position. I then consider and reject several possible responses that an epiphenomenalist might offer. The discussion thus shows that epiphenomenalist accounts of phenomenal knowledge—such as the third‐factor model and the constitutional model—are ultimately indefensible.
现象性知识和现象性因果关系
在副现象主义的情况下,我们是否能够拥有现象知识一直存在广泛的争论。本文旨在结束这一争论。我首先发展了一种对知识的精细的因果解释——它足够谦虚,可以避免各种假定的问题,但又足够有力,可以削弱副现象主义的立场。然后,我考虑并拒绝副现象主义者可能提供的几种可能的回答。因此,讨论表明,现象知识的副现象主义解释——如第三因素模型和宪法模型——最终是站不住脚的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信