对S·悉达多“反对现象级结合”的回答

IF 0.7 Q4 ETHICS

European Journal of Analytic Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-04-06 DOI:10.31820/ejap.18.1.4

Gregory Miller

{"title":"对S·悉达多“反对现象级结合”的回答","authors":"Gregory Miller","doi":"10.31820/ejap.18.1.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this journal S Siddharth has recently argued that the phenomenal bonding response to the subject summing argument for panpsychism is question begging, therefore we should reject constitutive forms of panpsychism. The argument specifically focuses on the proposals of Goff and Miller. In this reply, I show that the argument is unsound.","PeriodicalId":32823,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Analytic Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Reply to S Siddharth’s ‘Against Phenomenal Bonding’\",\"authors\":\"Gregory Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.31820/ejap.18.1.4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this journal S Siddharth has recently argued that the phenomenal bonding response to the subject summing argument for panpsychism is question begging, therefore we should reject constitutive forms of panpsychism. The argument specifically focuses on the proposals of Goff and Miller. In this reply, I show that the argument is unsound.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Analytic Philosophy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Analytic Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31820/ejap.18.1.4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Analytic Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31820/ejap.18.1.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

在这本期刊中，S Siddharth最近认为，对泛精神主义主题总结论点的惊人的联系反应是令人质疑的，因此我们应该拒绝泛精神主义的构成形式。这场争论特别集中在戈夫和米勒的提议上。在这个答复中，我表明这个论点是不合理的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

A Reply to S Siddharth’s ‘Against Phenomenal Bonding’

In this journal S Siddharth has recently argued that the phenomenal bonding response to the subject summing argument for panpsychism is question begging, therefore we should reject constitutive forms of panpsychism. The argument specifically focuses on the proposals of Goff and Miller. In this reply, I show that the argument is unsound.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

European Journal of Analytic Philosophy Arts and Humanities-Philosophy

CiteScore

1.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

22 weeks