tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3736365491401043672.post4386021560150422534..comments2024-01-16T09:31:45.073-04:00Comments on Anderson Brown's Philosophy Blog: Externalist Non-Reductive Materialism vs. Internalist Non-Reductive MaterialismAnderson Brownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18358008464457746997noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3736365491401043672.post-78999492864744541912008-12-10T13:48:00.000-04:002008-12-10T13:48:00.000-04:00I'm only just getting to grips with a few contempo...I'm only just getting to grips with a few contemporary philosophers, but it looks like it's time to do some more reading starting with the classics!<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the reply, for the original post, and for the blog in general, all of which are Good Stuff!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3736365491401043672.post-59869837061381558952008-12-09T09:19:00.000-04:002008-12-09T09:19:00.000-04:00Matt, Yes, the question is is anyone entitled to "...Matt, Yes, the question is is anyone entitled to "nonreductive materialism" or must we choose between dualism and reductive materialism? In classical philosophy these positions are represented by Aristotle, Plato and Democritus respectively. Aristotle is understood as a nonreductive materialist variety of functionalist because he thinks that primary being is physical particulars, "substances," by which he means unions of form and matter. Thus he rejects the Platonic dualism of formal properties that exist whether or not they happen to be instantiated by physical particulars.<BR/>My current view is that Plato might be right, that the existence of formal properties must be recognized as justifying metaphysical dualism. However viz-a-viz the mind/body problem I would then point out that the form/matter distinction is a general metaphysical problem, and that there is no metaphysical issue here, at least in so far as formal properties go, that is specific to the mind/body distinction.Anderson Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18358008464457746997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3736365491401043672.post-46401765939677510552008-12-06T12:43:00.000-04:002008-12-06T12:43:00.000-04:00How can a "token-to-token identity" be accomplishe...How can a "token-to-token identity" be accomplished without either abandoning the "non-reductive" part of the view (by finding a physical means to achieve it), or abandoning "materialism" (by accepting a dualism)?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3736365491401043672.post-26985941445798612192008-12-04T20:15:00.000-04:002008-12-04T20:15:00.000-04:00This is one of the most interesting and informativ...This is one of the most interesting and informative blog posts on the blogosphere. <BR/><BR/>Thank you so much, Dr. Brown. Please, keep it up, for we keen and eager physicalists and naturalists out there!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3736365491401043672.post-8886323944488085442008-12-04T17:15:00.000-04:002008-12-04T17:15:00.000-04:00As a Kantian, I take the view of transcendental id...As a Kantian, I take the view of transcendental idealism (math) in accordance with material realism (physics).<BR/><BR/>(Empty) space, time, and numbers falsify the actual physcial world of objects, motion, and change, but we're only human.OilIsMasteryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13457713647671999890noreply@blogger.com