The obscurity of the physical: an objection to Chalmers’ conceivability argument

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Felipe G. A. Moreira
{"title":"The obscurity of the physical: an objection to Chalmers’ conceivability argument","authors":"Felipe G. A. Moreira","doi":"10.4013/fsu.2020.213.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A zombie world is a possible world in which all the microphysical truths are identical to the truths in our world, but no one is phenomenally conscious. A zombie is an individual in a possible world whose microphysical truths are identical to the microphysical truths of an individual in our world, but who has none of the phenomenal conscious experiences of the individual in our world. An inverted is an individual in a possible world whose microphysical truths are not only identical to the microphysical truths of an individual in our world, but who also has phenomenal conscious experiences. These experiences, however, are qualitatively different from the ones of the individual in our world. The first premise of Chalmers’ conceivability argument against materialism is that a zombie world, a zombie and an inverted are ideally conceivable. This paper rejects this premise in claiming that: given that current physics does not allow philosophers to establish a clear concept of the physical that could be opposed to something else non-physical, a zombie world, a zombie and an inverted are merely prima facie, but not ideally conceivable. This objection is called the  Obscurity of the Physical Objection. Key-words:  Zombies, qualia, conceivability, possibility, physics.","PeriodicalId":41989,"journal":{"name":"Filosofia Unisinos","volume":"21 1","pages":"296-302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filosofia Unisinos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4013/fsu.2020.213.07","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A zombie world is a possible world in which all the microphysical truths are identical to the truths in our world, but no one is phenomenally conscious. A zombie is an individual in a possible world whose microphysical truths are identical to the microphysical truths of an individual in our world, but who has none of the phenomenal conscious experiences of the individual in our world. An inverted is an individual in a possible world whose microphysical truths are not only identical to the microphysical truths of an individual in our world, but who also has phenomenal conscious experiences. These experiences, however, are qualitatively different from the ones of the individual in our world. The first premise of Chalmers’ conceivability argument against materialism is that a zombie world, a zombie and an inverted are ideally conceivable. This paper rejects this premise in claiming that: given that current physics does not allow philosophers to establish a clear concept of the physical that could be opposed to something else non-physical, a zombie world, a zombie and an inverted are merely prima facie, but not ideally conceivable. This objection is called the  Obscurity of the Physical Objection. Key-words:  Zombies, qualia, conceivability, possibility, physics.
物理的晦涩:反对查尔默斯的可想象论证
僵尸世界是一个可能的世界,在这个世界中,所有微观物理真理都与我们世界中的真理相同,但没有人有非凡的意识。僵尸是一个可能世界中的个体,其微观物理真理与我们世界中个体的微观物理真理完全相同,但却没有我们世界中个人非凡的意识体验。倒置者是一个可能世界中的个体,其微观物理真理不仅与我们世界中个体的微观物理真理相同,而且还具有非凡的意识体验。然而,这些经历与我们世界中的个人经历有着质的不同。Chalmers反对唯物主义的可构想性论点的第一个前提是,僵尸世界、僵尸和颠倒的世界是理想的可构想的。本文拒绝了这一前提,声称:鉴于当前的物理学不允许哲学家建立一个明确的物理概念,可以与其他非物理概念对立,僵尸世界、僵尸和倒置世界只是表面上的证据,但不是理想的想象。这种异议被称为物理异议的模糊性。关键词:僵尸,疑虑,可想象性,可能性,物理学。
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
Filosofia Unisinos
Filosofia Unisinos PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信