DOCSLIB.ORG

Galen John Strawson Curriculum Vitae

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Galen John Strawson Curriculum Vitae GALEN JOHN STRAWSON CURRICULUM VITAE ———————————————————————————————————————— Address Dept of Philosophy, UT Austin, 1 University Station C3500 (WAG 316), Austin TX 78712 Telephone 512-471-4857 Email [email protected] Date of birth February 5 1952 Nationality British ———————————————————————————————————————— Education Trinity Hall, Cambridge [scholar] 1969–73 Oriental Sciences (Prelims [1st], Part I [1st]) 1969–71 Social and Political Sciences (no exam) 1971–72 Moral Sciences (Part II [2.1]) 1972–73 Wolfson College, Oxford 1974–83 B.Phil. [philosophy] 1977 D.Phil. [philosophy] 1983 Ecole Normale Supérieure (auditeur libre) 1977–78 Sorbonne Paris I (French government scholar) 1977–78 Awards R. A. Nicholson Prize for Islamic Studies, Cambridge 1971 Senior Student Scholarship, Trinity Hall, Cambridge 1974 French Government Scholar 1977–78 T. H. Green Prize for Moral Philosophy, Oxford 1983 British Academy/Leverhulme Trust Senior Research Fellowship 1997–98 British Academy /Leverhulme Trust Senior Research Fellowship 2009–10 Romanell Lecture Award, American Philosophical Association 2011 Old Dominion Fellowship, Humanities Council, Princeton 2011 Posts Assistant editor, Times Literary Supplement 1978–87 Lecturer in Philosophy, University College, Oxford 1979–80 Lecturer in Philosophy, Exeter College, Oxford 1980–83 Lecturer in Philosophy, St. Hugh’s College, Oxford 1983–85 Lecturer in Philosophy, New College, Oxford 1985–86 Lecturer in Philosophy, St. Hilda’s College, Oxford 1986–87 Fellow in Philosophy, Jesus College, Oxford 1987–2000 Visiting Research Fellow, Research School of Social Sciences, Canberra 1993 Visiting Professor, New York University 1997 [Fall] Visiting Professor, Rutgers University 2000 [Fall] Consultant editor, Times Literary Supplement 1987–2012 Academic Trustee, Kennedy Memorial Trust 1998–2003 Professor of Philosophy, University of Reading 2000–2013 Distinguished Professor, CUNY Graduate Center 2004–7 [half time] Visiting Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2010 [spring] Visiting Professor, Copenhagen University 2011 [spring] Old Dominion Fellow, Humanities Council, Princeton 2011 [fall] Visiting Professor, École des hautes études en sciences sociales, Paris 2012 [spring] Visiting Research Fellow, Research School of Social Sciences, Canberra 2012 [winter] current President’s Chair in Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin 2012– Boards Editorial: Philosophy & Phenomenological Research 1996– Editorial: Ratio 2000– 2013 Advisory: Phenomenology and Cognitive Science 2002– Advisory: Danish NRF Centre for Subjectivity Research 2002– Referees 1 Prof. John McDowell, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh, 1012 Cathedral of Learning, Pittsburgh, PA 15250, USA [email protected] 2 Prof. Thomas Nagel, Dept of Philosophy, New York University, 100 Washington Square East, New York, NY 10003 USA [email protected] 3 Prof. Jerry Fodor, 61 W 62nd St, New York, NY 10023 [email protected] PUBLICATIONS: BOOKS ———————————————————————————————————————— 2016 (forthcoming) The I, the I: essays on the subject of experience (Oxford) 2014 [1] Locke on personal identity: Consciousness and Concernment revised edn (Princeton) xvi+259pp [2] The Secret Connexion: Realism, Causation, and David Hume new 2nd edn (Oxford) xv+246pp 2013 [3] The Evident Connexion: Hume on personal identity revised paperback edn (Oxford) xii+165pp 2011 [4] The Evident Connexion: Hume on personal identity (Oxford) xii+165pp [5] Selves: An Essay in Revisionary Metaphysics corrected paperback edn (Oxford) xxv+448pp [6] Locke on personal identity: Consciousness and Concernment (Princeton) xvi+259pp 2010 [7] Freedom and Belief revised 2nd edn, with new appendix (Oxford) xii+324pp 2009 [8] Selves: An Essay in Revisionary Metaphysics (Oxford) xix+448pp [9] Mental Reality 2nd edn, corrected with new appendix (MIT Press) xxi+400pp 2008 [10] Real Materialism and Other Essays (Oxford) ix+488pp 1994 [11] Mental Reality (MIT Press) xiv+337pp [trans. La Realidad Mental (Spanish) (Barcelona 1997)] 1989 [12] The Secret Connexion: Realism, Causation, and David Hume (Oxford) 305pp [paperback with corrections, 1991; 2nd paperback edn with new corrections, index of quoted passages, 1996; reprinted 2003] 1986 [13] Freedom and Belief (Oxford) xiv+339pp CO-AUTHORED BOOKS 2006 [14] Consciousness and its place in nature ed. A. Freeman (Imprint Academic) keynote paper and reply to commentaries pp 3–31, 184–280 (see under papers); reprinted with corrections 2007; reprinted with further corrections 2010 1999 [15] Models of the Self, ed. S. Gallagher & J. Shear (Imprint Academic) keynote paper and reply to commentaries pp 1–24, 483–518 (see under papers) EDITED BOOKS 2011 [16] Philosophical Writings by P. F. Strawson (with M. Montague ) (Oxford) 2005 [17] The Self? editor, introducer, and contributor (Oxford: Blackwell) xii+129pp 2 PUBLICATIONS: PAPERS ———————————————————————————————————————— 2016/2017 (forthcoming) ‘The concept of consciousness in the twentieth century’ in Consciousness ed A. Simmons (Oxford) 2015 (in press) [18] ‘The unstoried life’ in On Life-Writing ed Z. Leader (Oxford, September) [19] ‘“The secrets of all hearts”: Locke on personal identity’ in Mind, Self, and Person, ed. A. O’Hear (Royal Institute of Philosophy/Cambridge) [20] ‘Mind and being: the primacy of panpsychism’ in Panpsychism: Philosophical Essays, ed. G. Bruntrup and L. Jaskolla (Oxford) [21] ‘Real direct realism’ in Phenomenal Qualities: Sense, Perception, and Consciousness ed. P. Coates and S. Coleman (Oxford) [22] Nietzsche’s metaphysics?’ in Nietzsche on Mind and Nature ed. M. Dries and P. Kail (Oxford) 2015 [23] ‘Real materialism’ revised with new postscript in Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian monism, ed. T Alter and Y. Nagasawa (Oxford) pp 161-208 [24] ‘Freedom and the self: feeling and belief’ in Freedom and Resentment at 50: Oxford Studies in Agency and Responsibility 2, ed. N. Tognazzini and D. Shoemaker (Oxford) pp [25] ‘Free will’ in Norton Introduction to Philosophy ed. A. Byrne, J. Cohen, G. Rosen and S. Shiffrin pp [26] ‘When I enter most intimately into what I call myself’, in Oxford Handbook of David Hume ed. P. Russell pp [27] ‘The Consciousness Myth’ Times Literary Supplement (February 27) [revised and expanded version with notes and bibliography https://www.academia.edu/11234039/The_consciousness_myth_2015] 2014 [28] ‘“Humeanism”’ in Journal of the American Philosophical Association 1 pp 96–102 2013 [29] ‘Self-intimation’ in Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences doi 10.1007/s11097-013-9339-6 [print version Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 14 pp 1–31 [30] ‘A dialogue on free will’ in Methode: Analytic Perspectives 2/3: 200–204 (Free Will: Thirty points of view ed S. Bonicalzi and M. De Caro) http://www.methodejournal.org/index.php?journal=meth [31] ‘Language without Communication Intentions’ on academia.edu http://www.academia.edu/3618780/ 2012 [32] ‘Real naturalism’, Romanell Lecture, in Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association 86/2 pp 125–154 [33] ‘I and I: immunity to error through misidentification of the subject’ in Immunity to Error Through Misidentification: New Essays ed. S. Prosser and F. Recanati (Cambridge) pp 202– 223. [34] ‘All My Hopes Vanish: Hume on the Mind’ in The Continuum Companion to Hume ed. A Bailey and D. O’Brien (London: Continuum) pp 181–198 [35] ‘We live beyond any tale that we happen to enact’ in Harvard Review of Philosophy 18 pp 73- 90 2011 [36] ‘Cognitive phenomenology: real life’ in Cognitive Phenomenology ed. T. Bayne and M. Montague (Oxford) pp 285–325 [37] ‘The impossibility of ultimate responsibility?’ in Free Will and Modern Science ed. R. Swinburne (London: British Academy) (December) pp 126–40 [38] ‘Owning the Past: Reply to Stokes’ Journal of Consciousness Studies 18 pp 170–95 [39] ‘The minimal subject’ in Oxford Handbook of the Self ed. S. Gallagher (Oxford) pp 253–278 2010 [40] ‘Radical Self-Awareness’ in Self, No Self?: Perspectives from Analytical, Phenomenological, and Indian Traditions ed. M. Siderits, E. Thompson, D. Zahavi (Oxford) pp 274–307 [41] ‘The depth(s) of the twentieth century’ Analysis 70/4 p 1. [42] ‘Fundamental Singleness: how to turn the 2nd Paralogism into a valid argument’ in The Metaphysics of Consciousness ed. P. Basile et al (Cambridge) pp 61-92 [43] ‘Narrativity and non-Narrativity’ in Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 1: 775- 80 2009 [44] ‘Against “corporism”: the two uses of I’ Organon F 16 pp 428–448 [45] ‘The Self’ in The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mind, ed. B. McLaughlin & A. Beckermann (Oxford) pp 541-64 [46] ‘5 Questions on Mind and Consciousness’ in Mind and Consciousness: 5 Questions (Automatic Press/VIP) pp 191–204 [47] ‘5 Questions on Action’ in Philosophy of Action: 5 Questions (Automatic Press/VIP) pp 253–9 [48] ‘On the sesmet theory of subjectivity’ in Mind That Abides ed. D. Skrbina (Amsterdam: John Benjamins) pp 57–64 2008 [49] ‘The identity of the categorical and the dispositional’ Analysis 68/4 pp 271–82 [50] ‘Introduction’ in Real Materialism and Other Essays [‘RMAOE'] pp 1–18 [51] ‘Real Intentionality 3’ Teorema 27: 35–69 (in RMAOE) [52] ‘Can we know the nature of reality as it is in itself?’ (in RMAOE); revised version of ‘Knowledge of the world’ (2002) [53] ‘The Impossibility of Ultimate Moral Responsibility’ in (RMAOE); revised version of ‘The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility’ (1994) 2007 [54] ‘Why I have no future’ in The Philosophers’ Magazine 38 pp 21–6 [55] ‘Episodic
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Galen Strawson, Selves. an Essay in Revisionary Metaphysics
    Review: Galen Strawson, Selves. An Essay in Revisionary Metaphysics Ludwig Gierstl & Ludwig J. Jaskolla In 1929, Alfred North Whitehead wrote that philosophy never reverts to its old position after the shock of a great philosopher1. It might be the case that Galen Strawson's Selves2 causes such a shock. Selves is a brilliant piece of philosophy synthesizing deep insights into nature of human experience with speculative force3. Although, the book can- not be said to be easily accessible, studying it is rewarding and can be recommended to almost any philosopher interested in Metaphysics or Philosophy of Mind. In the following paragraphs, we are going to give a systematic sketch of Strawson's main line of thought and his central arguments. Basically, Selves can be divided into two main parts: The rst part addresses the phenomenology of the self as understood in our everyday approach to the world, while the second part discusses the phenomenological ndings of the rst part in terms of metaphysics. Despite this two-fold structure, we emphasize that due to our understanding both parts are interrelated systematically and methodologically forming a coherent whole. 1 The Phenomenology of the Self As everybody familiar with the debate concerning personal identity knows, there is abundant literature discussing the typical phenomenolog- ical features of the self or in particular: the human self. This ordinary account of the varieties of experiences tied to the self is merely deriva- tively Strawson's target. He is mainly interested in the discussion of one particular phenomenon which he calls SELF-experience. This phe- nomenon is best characterized in contrast to other experiences: While I may have a stinging pain in my left arm which is so strong that it eects my whole experiential pattern, the fact that my self is in some way part of this experience is not SELF-experience.
    [Show full text]
  • The Consciousness Deniers | by Galen Strawson | NYR Daily | the New York Review of Books 4/4/18, 12(56 PM
    The Consciousness Deniers | by Galen Strawson | NYR Daily | The New York Review of Books 4/4/18, 12(56 PM The Consciousness Deniers Galen Strawson What is the silliest claim ever made? The competition is fierce, but I think the answer is easy. Some people have denied the existence of consciousness: conscious experience, the subjective character of experience, the “what-it-is-like” of experience. Next to this denial—I’ll call it “the Denial”—every known religious belief is only a little less sensible than the belief that grass is green. The Denial began in the twentieth century and continues today in a few pockets of philosophy and psychology and, now, information technology. It had two main causes: the rise of the behaviorist approach in psychology, and the naturalistic approach in philosophy. These were good things in their way, but they spiraled out of control and gave birth to the Great Silliness. I want to consider these Courtesy the artist and Galerie Buchholz/The Museum of Modern Art/Licensed by SCALA / Art Resource, NY main causes first, and then say something rather gloomy Lucy McKenzie: Untitled, 2002 about a third, deeper, darker cause. But before that, I need to comment on what is being denied—consciousness, conscious experience, experience for short. What is it? Anyone who has ever seen or heard or smelled anything knows what it is; anyone who has ever been in pain, or felt hungry or hot or cold or remorseful, dismayed, uncertain, or sleepy, or has suddenly remembered a missed appointment. All these things involve what are sometimes called “qualia”—that is to say, different types or qualities of conscious experience.
    [Show full text]
  • The Elusive Origins of Consciousness: a Philosophical Argument for Panpsychism Over Competing Metaphysical Theories of Mind
    Trinity College Trinity College Digital Repository Trinity Publications (Newspapers, Yearbooks, The Trinity Papers (2011 - present) Catalogs, etc.) 2019 The Elusive Origins of Consciousness: A Philosophical Argument for Panpsychism over Competing Metaphysical Theories of Mind Tommy Tobias Aahlberg Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/trinitypapers Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Aahlberg, Tommy Tobias, "The Elusive Origins of Consciousness: A Philosophical Argument for Panpsychism over Competing Metaphysical Theories of Mind". The Trinity Papers (2011 - present) (2019). Trinity College Digital Repository, Hartford, CT. https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/trinitypapers/79 The Elusive Origins of Consciousness: A Philosophical Argument for Panpsychism over Competing Metaphysical Theories of Mind Tommy Tobias Aahlberg Introduction Underpinning everything that constitutes our perceived reality is consciousness. The fact that there is something that it is like to be us is at the foundation of everything we consequently come to care about in our lives. Every observation, sensation, thought, and emotion is predicated on the phenomenon that there is something that it is like to observe, sense, think, and feel. The awareness and experience of a world is the essential factor that separates our universe from any conceivable zombie universe where nothing is observed, sensed, thought, or felt. Necessarily, we filter every single moment through our consciousness. If consciousness did not exist there would be no groundwork for meaning as it would hold no basis in any conceivable creature’s awareness, and therefore such a universe would be meaningless. Despite, or perhaps due to, its fundamental nature and important implications – consciousness is poorly understood by contemporary science and philosophy alike, at least in the theoretical sense of understanding.
    [Show full text]
  • Naturalism Nagel and Theism.Docx
    Nagel, Naturalism and Theism Todd Moody (Saint Joseph’s University, Philadelphia) In his recent controversial book, Mind and Cosmos, Thomas Nagel writes: Many materialist naturalists would not describe their view as reductionist. But to those who doubt the adequacy of such a world view, the different attempts to accommodate within it mind and related phenomena all appear as attempts to reduce the true extent of reality to a common basis that is not rich enough for the purpose. Hence the resistance can be brought together as antireductionism.1 I want to discuss the italicized phrases and their implications. First, the term “materialist naturalist” calls for comment. Materialism is understood to be the ontological thesis that material things, or perhaps physical things and physical properties, are the only things there are. What does “naturalist” add to this? Nagel explains: I will use the terms “materialism” or “materialist naturalism” to refer to one side of this conflict and “antireductionism” to refer to the other side, even though the terms are rather rough.2 Elsewhere he adds, [T]here is ultimately one way that the natural order is intelligible, namely, through physical law—law—everything that exists and everything that happens can in principle be explained by the laws that govern the physical universe.3 What “naturalism” adds to materialism is the thesis that all that happens in the physical realm is “explained”, i.e., described by “mathematically stateable” laws.4 So much for “materialist naturalist.” Turning to the second italicized passage, we see that Nagel believes that this project has failed and must fail.
    [Show full text]
  • Consciousness As a Biological Phenomenon : an Alternative to Panpsychism
    This is a repository copy of Consciousness as a Biological Phenomenon : An Alternative to Panpsychism. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/132202/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Wilson, Catherine orcid.org/0000-0002-0760-4072 (Accepted: 2018) Consciousness as a Biological Phenomenon : An Alternative to Panpsychism. Harvard Review of Philosophy. (In Press) Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Consciousness as a Biological Phenomenon: An Alternative to Panpsychism 1 Catherine Wilson University of York (UK) The Graduate Center, CUNY Forthcoming in Harvard Review of Philosophy. Abstract: Following centuries of Cartesianism, which ascribed conscious awareness to humans alone, philosophers have begun to explore the possibility that experience in some form is widely distributed in the universe. It has been proposed that consciousness may pertain to machines, rocks, elementary particles, and perhaps the universe itself. This paper shows why philosophers have good reason to suppose that experiences are widely distributed in living nature, including worms and insects, but why panpsychism extending to non-living nature is an implausible doctrine.
    [Show full text]
  • FREE WILL Galen Strawson
    FREE WILL Galen Strawson Abstract ‘Free will’ is the conventional name of a topic that is best discussed without reference to the will. It is a topic in metaphysics and ethics as much as in the philosophy of mind. Its central questions are ‘What is it to act (or choose) freely?’, and ‘What is it to be morally responsible for one’s actions (or choices)?’ These two questions are closely connected, for it seems clear that freedom of action is a necessary condition of moral responsibility, even if it is not sufficient. Philosophers give very different answers to these questions. Consequently they give very different answers to two more specific questions, which are questions about ourselves: (1) Are we free agents? and (2) Can we be morally responsible for what we do? Answers to (1) and (2) range from ‘Yes, Yes’, to ‘No, No’-via ‘Yes, No’ and various degrees of ‘Perhaps’, ‘Possibly’, and ‘In a sense’. (The fourth pair of outright answers, ‘No, Yes’, is rare, but it has a kind of existentialist panache, and appears to be embraced by Wintergreen in Joseph Heller’s novel Closing Time, as well as by some Protestants). Prominent among the ‘Yes, Yes’ sayers are the compatibilists. They have this name because they hold that free will is compatible with determinism. Briefly, determinism is the view that the history of the universe is fixed: every- thing that happens is necessitated by what has already gone before, in such a way that nothing can happen otherwise than it does. According to compatibilists, freedom is compatible with determinism because freedom is essentially just a matter of not being constrained or hindered in certain ways when one acts or chooses.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments on Galen Strawson ‘Realistic Monism: Why Physicalism Entails Panpsychism’1
    Daniel Stoljar Comments on Galen Strawson ‘Realistic Monism: Why Physicalism Entails Panpsychism’1 There is at least one element in Strawson’s extremely rich paper that seems to me to be correct and important, and Strawson is absolutely right to bring it out. This is the point that people in philosophy of mind go around assuming that they know what the physical facts are, if not in detail then in outline: ‘… they think they know a lot about the nature of the physical’ (Strawson, 2006, p. 4). This assumption is false, or at any rate implausible, or at any rate un-argued for. To make the assumption, Strawson says, is a ‘very large mistake. It is perhaps Des- cartes’s, or perhaps rather “Descartes’s”, greatest mistake, and it is funny that in the past fifty years it has been the most fervent revilers of the great Descartes, the true father of modern materialism, who have made the mistake with most intensity’ (p. 5; footnote omitted). Strawson says that the mistake is not only large: it is fatal. Here too I agree, though I think I would express the fatality somewhat differently from him. In my view, the mistake is fatal because, on the assumption that we are ignorant of some of the crucial facts, the central pieces of reasoning in philosophy of mind collapse. For example, consider the zombie argument against materialism, or, as Strawson would say for reasons slightly opaque to me, the Australian (p. 22, fn. 37) zombie argument. Its first premise is that it is conceivable that I have a zombie duplicate; that is, there is someone identical to me in respect of every physical fact, but different from me in respect of some experiential fact.
    [Show full text]
  • Panpsychism, Priority Cosmopsychism and Information
    Fundamental Consciousness: Panpsychism, Priority Cosmopsychism and Information By Nino Kadić Submitted to Central European University Department of Philosophy In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Master of Philosophy Supervisor: Philip A. Goff Budapest, Hungary CEU eTD Collection 2016 Abstract In this thesis, I argue that consciousness cannot be explained solely in terms of the facts revealed to us by empirical science. This is explained through a discussion of the explanatory gap between our knowledge of physical facts and those regarding consciousness. Specifically, I argue against the Phenomenal Concept Strategy, a fairly recent approach to answering anti-physicalist arguments. I then claim that if we take consciousness as something that cannot be explained in purely physical terms, we must also say that it is a fundamental and ubiquitous feature of reality. I explain the motivation for accepting this claim by considering what it means for something to be an intrinsic nature and by addressing the problem of strong emergence. The result of these considerations is panpsychism, the theory that consciousness truly is fundamental and ubiquitous. After that, I introduce the combination problem, the issue of how small subjects combine into bigger subjects. Priority cosmopsychism is then offered as a possible way of avoiding the combination problem. I then argue against priority cosmopsychism, claiming instead that we should remain panpsychists. I then move on to suggest a solution to the combination problem based on a discussion of syntactic and semantic information. I argue that information can be used to explain how small subjects bond to form bigger subjects. The final result is an informational form of panpsychism.
    [Show full text]
  • A Novel Reading of Thomas Nagel's
    Organon F 2021: 1–17 ISSN 2585-7150 (online) DOI (to be assigned) ISSN 1335-0668 (print) RESEARCH ARTICLE A Novel Reading of Thomas Nagel’s “Challenge” to Physicalism Serdal Tümkaya* Received: 12 June 2020 / Accepted: 18 November 2020 Abstract: In passing remarks, some commentators have noted that for Nagel, physicalism is true. It has even been argued that Nagel seeks to find the best path to follow to achieve future physicalism. I advance these observations by adding that for Nagel, we should dis- cuss the consciousness problem not in terms of physical and mental issues but in terms of our desire to include consciousness in an objec- tive/scientific account, and we can achieve this only by revising our self-conception, i.e., folk psychology, to develop a more detached view of experience. Through the project of objective phenomenology, Nagel aims to achieve some sort of objective, detached, and scientific ex- planation of the subjective nature of experience. This project seeks to make the truth of physicalism intelligible and consciousness more amenable to scientific study, potentially raising an even broader con- cept than the one physicalism originally proposes. Keywords: Folk psychology; Nagel; objective phenomenology; physi- calism; science of consciousness. * Middle East Technical University and Ardahan University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2453-4184 Ardahan University Yenisey Kampüsü, Çamlıçatak, Ardahan Department of Phi- losophy, 75002 Ardahan, Turkey. [email protected] © The Author. Journal compilation © The Editorial Board, Organon F. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attri- bution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
    [Show full text]
  • Nietzsche on Mind and Nature
    OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 8/6/2015, SPi Nietzsche on Mind and Nature edited by Manuel Dries and P. J. E. Kail Preview - Copyrighted Material 1 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 8/6/2015, SPi 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries # the several contributors 2015 The moral rights of the authors have been asserted First Edition published in 2015 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number: 2014954288 ISBN 978–0–19–872223–6 Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only.
    [Show full text]
  • Determinism and the Role of Moral Responsibility Justin Edward Edens University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 5-2017 Determinism and the Role of Moral Responsibility Justin Edward Edens University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Edens, Justin Edward, "Determinism and the Role of Moral Responsibility" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 1987. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1987 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Determinism and the Role of Moral Responsibility A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Philosophy by Justin Edens University of Central Arkansas Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy, 2012 May 2017 University of Arkansas _____________________________ Dr. Warren Herold Thesis Director _____________________________ _____________________________ Dr. Eric Funkhouser Dr. Richard Lee Committee Member Committee Member Abstract In order to solve the apparent incompatibility between moral responsibility and determinism, it is necessary to understand moral responsibility in terms of the function it plays within moral systems, which is highly similar to the role played by laws within judicial systems. By showing that a conception of moral responsibility based upon desert is metaphysically untenable, a function-based conception will be showed to be much more likely. Furthermore, by considering why the desert-based conception has proven so resilient, insight into the moral responsibility/determinism debate may be possible.
    [Show full text]
  • ~Mind and Being Primacy of Panpsychism Strawson March2016
    Mind and Being: The Primacy of Panpsychism Galen Strawson to appear in Panpsychism: Philosophical Essays ed Brüntrup and Jaskolla (OUP). Updated February 2016 ——————————————————————————————————— 0. Introduction I’ll start with a metaphysical creed—four propositions. I’m confident that the first three are true, and I suspect that the fourth is true, but I don't think one has to accept any of them to agree with my principal thesis—the thesis of the primacy of panpsychism, the highly unoriginal thesis that there are compelling reasons for favouring panpsychism above all other positive substantive proposals about the fundamental nature of concrete reality. I’ll state the four propositions first in German because I like the way they sound in German. [1] Stoff ist Kraft, [2] Wesen ist Werden, [3] Sein ist Sosein, [4] Ansichsein ist Fürsichsein. These are identity claims—fully reversible. I’m not going to argue for them but I’ll provide a few glosses.1 1. Stoff ist Kraft [1] Stoff ist Kraft. Matter is force or as I will say energy: [1] matter is energy. Strictly speaking matter is only one form of concrete being, but I’ll use the word loosely to mean all concrete stuff: all concrete being is energy—energy-activity, energy-stuff. I’m using the word ‘energy’ as Heisenberg does when he writes that “energy is a substance”, “all particles are made of the same substance: energy” (Heisenberg 1958, 63; 71), and putting aside the common use according to which ‘energy’ denotes the power of ‘doing work’ contained in or possessed by a body or system of bodies.
    [Show full text]