DOCSLIB.ORG

Hume's Functionalism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hume's Functionalism Hume’s Functionalistic Theory of the Self A Dissertation Presented by Sardar Hosseini Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for a doctoral degree in Philosophy Department of Philosophy Arts University of Ottawa © Sardar Hosseini, Ottawa, Canada, 2013 To the memory of my father and my first teacher, Asadullah Hosseini i Abstract The main claim of this dissertation is that Hume’s theory of the self can be interpreted in terms of a causal or functional theory of mind. It is a thesis about Hume’s identification of mental particulars―impressions and ideas―in terms of the kind of roles that each plays in the cognitive system that it is a member of. The true Humean idea of the human mind is to understand it as a system of different mental states and processes, which are linked together by the relation of cause and effect. Functionalism as such can be construed as both teleo-functionalism and psycho-functionalism. The former is rooted in his teleological characterization of the mind according to which the bundle of perceptions persists over time by maintaining functional continuity, whereas the main source of Hume’s psycho-functionalism lies in his Representational Theory of Mind. Hume, however, Hume expresses his strong dissatisfaction with his earlier treatment of the topic, and confesses that he now finds an inconsistency in his original account. He does not make clear in his recantation what he finds problematic in his earlier account. And although more than a dozen interpretations have been suggested, no consensus as to what Hume’s worry is has emerged. I claim that Hume’s functionalism, as presented in the main body of the Treatise, stores a problem for him and when he arrives at the Appendix he realises the problem and confesses that he is unable to resolve it. The problem that leads to the inconsistency has two main possible sources: First, the principles of constancy and coherence may successfully account for the arising belief in the idea of the continued and distinct existence of external objects and the idea of personal identity, but they fail to explain our belief in other minds (selves). Second, Hume’s functionalism is circular because it presupposes personal identity. The central idea is that if Hume is right to say that something like functional continuity would suffice for persons to persist through time, then he must show that we can have a complete account of how one’s mental states produce the idea of a persisting self without making assumption about the identity condition of their subject or bearer. And of course, psycho- functionalism, including Hume’s, identifies a mental state in terms of its functional relations to other mental states that are the states of the same person. This is straightforwardly circular. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMTNS In acknowledging those who have made it possible for me to complete this dissertation, I must express deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Professor David Raynor, who first introduced me to David Hume and guided me through this work. He offered continuous encouragement and innumerable stimulating ideas. I also thank the members of my dissertation committee: Professor Andrew Sneddon, Professor Graeme Hunter, and Professor Patrice Philie. Finally, I thank my wife, Zahra, and my son, Erfan, for their patience and encouragements over the years. I am grateful to them both. iii Table of Contents Acknowledgments iii List of Abbreviations v Introduction 1 I. Hume’s Functionalism: A First Approximation 19 I.1: The Lockean Background to Hume’s Functionalism 23 I.2: Hume’s Characterization of the Self as a Fiction 35 I.3: The Mind as a System of Causal Connection 44 I.4: Hume on the Nature of the Mind 55 II. Hume’s Computational Theory of Mind 78 II.1: Hume’s Mechanics of the Mind 80 II.2: The Imagination and Causal Inference 91 II.3: Hume on the Architecture of the Mind 97 II.4: Hume’s Representation Theory of Mind 106 • Hume on Mental Representation 109 • Hume on Computation 113 • Hume on Meaning 120 III. Hume’s Psychology of Identity Ascriptions 124 III.1: The Continued and Distinct Existence of External Objects 131 III.2: The Distinction between Constancy and Coherence 138 III.3: Hume’s Principle of Constancy 163 III.4: Hume’s Principle of Coherence 175 IV. Hume’s Functionalism and Personal Identity 186 IV.1: Hume on Character Traits, Self-Concerns, and Personal Identity 189 IV.2: Functionalism and the Psychological Continuity Criterion of Personal Identity 196 IV.3: Functionalism Tells us Nothing about Personal Identity 204 IV.4: Hume’s Reification of Perceptions and the Impersonal Description of the Self 214 IV.5: Tension in Hume’s Functionalistic Theory of Personal Identity 219 V. Hume’s Second Thoughts about Personal Identity 225 V.1: Interpretations of Hume’s Second Thoughts 230 V.2: Hume’s Criterion of Personal Identity: Constancy and Coherence 244 V.3: The Failure of Coherence and Constancy and the Belief in Other Minds 251 Notes and References 273 Bibliography 288 iv List of Abbreviations THN David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature. References are given by page number to the edition of L. A. Selby-Bigge revised by P. H. Nidditch (Oxford, 1978). EHU David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. References are given by page number to the edition of L. A. Selby-Bigge revised by P. H. Nidditch (Oxford, 1975). EPM David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. References are given by page number to the edition of L. A. Selby-Bigge revised by P. H. Nidditch (Oxford, 1975). EST David Hume, Of the Standard of Taste and Other Essays. References are given by page number to the edition of The Library of the Liberal Arts edited by J. W. Lenz (Indianapolis, 1965). Abs David Hume, An Abstract of a Book Lately Published, Entitled, A Treatise Of Human Nature, &c. References are given by paragraph numbers. Cited From the Clarendon Edition of A Treatise of Human Nature, Oxford: Clarendon Press 2007. EMPL David, Hume, Essays: Moral, Political, and Literary, edited by Eugene F. Miller, Library of Classics: Indianapolis, Ind., 1987. References are given by page number. Essay John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. References are given by page number to the edition of P. H. Nidditch (Oxford, 1975). AT C. Adam, P. Tannery (eds.), CEuvres de Descartes, revised ed., 12 vols. (Paris: Vrin/CNRS, 1964-76. CSM J. G. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, and D. Murdoch (eds.), The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, 2 vols., Cambridge University Press 1985. CSMK J. G. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, D. Murdoch, and A. Kenny (eds.), The Philosophical Writings of Descartes: The Correspondence, vol. III, Cambridge University Press 1991. v Introduction The seventeenth century philosophers were still thinking about the self in the mode of the Ancient and Scholastic traditions. They still breathed and thought within the scheme of that tradition according to which the self was conceived as the soul, an immaterial substance. Descartes’ substance dualism is said to be the most vigorous and spirited defence of such a view of the self at the very beginning of modern philosophy. He described the body as sheer mechanical processes which are subject to the laws of physics, whereas the unextended mind is situated completely outside the schema of the body and, thus, is not subject to the laws of physics. However, that view of the self was undergoing a massive transformation. Martin and Barresi (1) have called the seventeenth century “a time of momentous and soul-shattering intellectual transformation.” The natural philosophers of the century had already introduced the experimental method of reasoning into the sciences and had made great advances. Newton played a central role in showing that there could be a natural philosophy of the external world. On the other hand, the moral philosophers turned away from the dogmatic/scholastic conception of the soul as a mysterious immaterial substance and favoured to investigate the mind as a natural phenomenon. By the end of the eighteenth century the immaterial soul was replaced by the self as material mind, a dynamic natural system subject to general laws of natural philosophy. The new natural philosophy turned away from its predecessors’ dogmatic assertions about the essence of the soul, and instead, it started investigating the mind’s activities and states under the light of human experiences. So, the immaterial soul transformed into an empirical self, or mind. This transformation posited new possibilities about the nature of the self and the way we understand it as well as new challenges. Of course, it elevated our understanding of ourselves and deepened our perspective on how to explain our conscious mental activities, but it also caused serious philosophical controversies and existential terror. One major philosophical problem that this new understanding of ourselves caused was whether the self persists from moment to moment, or survives over time. This new emerging imaginary, or “fictitious,” to use Hume’s terminology, notion of the self was powerful enough to cause reaction among philosophers, which in turn, backfired and attracted some important eighteenth century philosophical figures to the idea of the mind as an immaterial substance. The outcome of 1 this soul-shattering transformation was that by the end of the eighteenth century, the mystery of the immaterial soul was replaced by the new mystery of the material self. Hume plays a major role in this soul-shattering intellectual transformation. He describes his own philosophy as an attempt to introduce the Newtonian Experimental Method of Reasoning into moral subjects. This scientific method of reasoning that is founded on experience and observation is said to be “a complete system of the sciences, built on a foundation almost entirely new, and the only one upon which they can stand with any security” (THN, xvi).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 the Concept of the Self in David Hume and the Buddha
    The Concept of the Self in David Hume and the Buddha Desh Raj Sirswal The concept of the self is a highly contested topic. Traditionally it belonged to speculative metaphysics. Almost every philosopher, whether Western or Indian, has tried to explore the nature of self. Generally, the self is taken as a substance which has permanent existence, which is eternal and non-specio-temporal. In some traditions, like the Hindu tradition, it is believed to take rebirth as the body perishes. Many Western philosophers also think that it is immortal. The nature of the self also has then ethical implications. The views of David Hume and Gautama Buddha on the self, which I have chosen to discuss here, are similar. Though both belong to different traditions, both are skeptical of any permanent existence of self. This is not to say that one has borrowed from the other. For the nature and purpose of denial of the self in both the philosophers is different. So a comprehensive and comparative study of their views is very interesting. It is the intention of this article to analyze and compare the philosophical positions of Gautama and Hume on the self—a problem which was of central concern to both and which has since exercised a continuing fascination for philosophers, both of the East and the West. Analysis of Hume’s Views on Self According to empiricism, human intellect and experiences are limited; so we cannot know of the absolute. David Hume, an eminent empiricist, concludes that the self is merely a composition of successive impressions.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Hume Attempting to Introduce a New, Pragmatic
    doi: 10.5007/1808-1711.2016v20n3p315 IS HUME ATTEMPTING TO INTRODUCE A NEW,PRAGMATIC CONCEPTION OF A CONTRADICTION IN HIS TREATISE? ALAN SCHWERIN Abstract. Hume’s Treatise, with its celebrated bundle theory of the self, is a significant con- tribution to the embryonic Newtonian experimental philosophy of the enlightenment. But the theory is inadequate as it stands, as the appendix to the Treatise makes clear. For this account of the self, apparently, rests on contradictory principles — propositions, fortunately, that can be reconciled, according to Hume. My paper is a critical exploration of Hume’s argument for this intriguing suggestion. Keywords: Contradiction; Aristotle; law of non-contradiction; bundle theory; labyrinth; pragmatism; self; Treatise; experimental philosophy; appendix. In general, this work is full of original thoughts that have all the merit of singularity. Bibliothèque Raisonnée 1740 The bundle theory of the self that David Hume develops in section VI of his Treatise of Human Nature in 1739 is a bold, and provocative account of a person. As might be expected, the suggestion that an individual is, “nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions” (Hume 1978, p.252) has elicited a wide range of vigorous critical responses from many concerned thinkers, philosophers and non-philosophers alike.1 Ironically enough, the charge against the theory began immediately after its formulation — by its own author! Hume is the first to point out that his innovative account of a person, that is central to his conception of personal identity, has to contend with a number of serious problems. Most importantly, as far as Hume is concerned, his Treatise view of a person is incomplete as it stands: what is required is a more robust foundation with additional, unfortunately elusive principles.
    [Show full text]
  • Consciousness, Personal Identity, and the Self/No-Self Debate
    Information about the Conference: http://eng.iph.ras.ru/7_8_11_2016.htm RAS Institute of Philosophy Tibetan Culture and Information Center in Moscow First International Conference “Buddhism and Phenomenology” November 7–8, 2016 RAS Institute of Philosophy, Moscow Supported by: Save Tibet Foundation Christian Coseru University of Charleston, USA Consciousness, Personal Identity, and the Self/No-Self Debate Associate professor of philosophy in the Department of Philosophy at the College of Charleston. He works in the fields of philosophy of mind, Phenomenology, and cross-cultural philosophy, especially Indian and Buddhist philosophy in dialogue with Western philosophy and cognitive science. He is the author of Perceiving Reality: Consciousness, Intentionality and Cognition in Buddhist Philosophy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), which offers a defense of phenomenological naturalism in comparative philosophy of mind; he is currently completing another book manuscript on phenomenological and analytic philosophical perspectives on consciousness. Consciousness, Personal Identity, and the Self/No-Self Debate Christian Coseru University of Charleston, USA Buddhism and Phenomenology Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences Tibetan Culture and Information Center Moscow, November 7, 2016 2 Plan for the talk 1. A brief summary of what is at stake in the self/no-self debate. 2. Review some challenges no-self theories face in explaining self- consciousness and self-knowledge. 3. Consider whether no-self theories can adequately capture the many facets of self-experience and self-knowledge. 4. Propose a new model for the structure of phenomenal consciousness. 5. Conclusion: Buddhism and Phenomenology: Allies or Rivals? 3 The Conundrum • Premise: Buddhist conceptions of personal identity rest on the no- self view (akin to Hume’s “bundle theory of self”).
    [Show full text]
  • Adding Aesthetics to “Knowledge Without Truth”
    Open Philosophy 2021; 4: 36–57 Research Article Gonzalo Vaillo* Superficiality and Representation: Adding Aesthetics to “Knowledge without Truth” https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2020-0150 received August 17, 2020; accepted January 4, 2021 Abstract: This article has two parts. The first one compares the ontological and epistemological implications of two main philosophical stances on how reality relates to appearance. I call the first group the “plane of superficiality,” where reality and appearance are the same; there is no gap between what a thing is and how it manifests itself. I call the second group “volume of representation,” in which reality is beyond appear- ances; there is an insurmountable gap between the thing and its phenomena. The second part of the article focuses on Graham Harman’s Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) as the second group’s contemporary posi- tion. Within the OOO epistemological model of “knowledge without truth,” Harman’s schema of the obser- ver’s participation in the object’s knowledge production is questioned. Alternatively, based on the notion proposed here of “flat representativity” in which each appearance is equally valuable to represent different aspects of the object, I argue for the full spectrum of the sensual as the basis for “knowledge without truth.” In particular, the aesthetic method, excluded from Harman’s concerns about knowledge, is suggested as another contribution to the episteme. Keywords: reality, appearance, aesthetics, knowledge, Object-Oriented Ontology, flat representativity 1 Introduction The relationship between reality and appearance is an important point (if not the central one) in any philosophical system and its associated knowledge model.
    [Show full text]
  • Can the Realist Bundle Theory Account for the Numerical Difference Between Qualitatively Non- Discernible Concrete Particulars?
    teorema Vol. XXXVIII/1, 2019, pp. 25-39 ISNN 0210-1602 [BIBLID 0210-1602 (2019) 38:1; pp. 25-39 Can the Realist Bundle Theory Account for the Numerical Difference Between Qualitatively Non- Discernible Concrete Particulars? Gastón Robert RESUMEN Según la versión realista de la teoría del cúmulo acerca de particulares concretos (RBT), los objetos concretos son totalidades complejas cuyos únicos constituyentes son universales. Una objeción que comúnmente se hace a RBT es el llamado ‘argumento a partir de la diferencia numérica’ (AND). Según AND, RBT falla debido a que no está ca- pacitada para dar cuenta de la posibilidad de objetos que son al mismo tiempo cualitati- vamente indiscernibles y numéricamente distintos, una posibilidad que toda ontología de particulares concretos aceptable debería ser capaz de explicar. Este artículo (i) presenta AND, (ii) explica una estrategia que (prima facie) podría permitir liberar RBT de AND y (iii) argumenta que dicha estrategia está en conflicto con una característica metodológica propia de las ‘ontologías constituyentes’, el tipo de ontológica al cual RBT pertenece. PALABRAS CLAVE: individuación (metafísica), universales, instanciación, constituyente, ontologías constituyentes. SUMMARY According to the realist bundle theory (RBT), ordinary concrete objects are com- plex wholes having universals, and only universals, as constituents. One charge usually levelled against RBT is the so-called ‘argument from numerical difference’ (AND). Ac- cording to AND, RBT fails because it cannot explain the possibility of qualitatively iden- tical yet numerically distinct objects, a possibility that any sound ontology of concrete particulars should be able to account for. This paper (i) presents AND (ii) explains one strategy that may prima facie liberate RBT from AND, and (iii) argues that this strategy comes at the cost of renouncing a methodological feature of ‘constituent ontologies’, the sort of ontology to which RBT belongs.
    [Show full text]
  • Simons Source: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol
    International Phenomenological Society Particulars in Particular Clothing: Three Trope Theories of Substance Author(s): Peter Simons Source: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 54, No. 3 (Sep., 1994), pp. 553-575 Published by: International Phenomenological Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2108581 Accessed: 26/09/2009 10:35 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ips. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. International Phenomenological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. http://www.jstor.org Philosophyand PhenomenologicalResearch Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Accounts of No-Self (Anatta) 1/8/2013 [email protected] Philosophy, University of New Hampshire
    Three Accounts of No-Self (Anatta) 1/8/2013 [email protected] Philosophy, University of New Hampshire Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Buddha’s practical orientation and the simile of the Poison Arrow ............................................................................. 1 SelfBrandom -- Kant, Hegel, and Sellars ............................................................................................................................. 2 Analogy - no sin ............................................................................................................................................................ 4 Three opponents: Empiricism, Cartesianism and Representationalism ....................................................................... 4 Empiricism ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Cartesians .............................................................................................................................................. 5 Representationalism ............................................................................................................................. 5 Against “Bundle Theories” ............................................................................................................................................ 6 ‘I’ is a “logical locution”
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Mind-Body Dichotomy: a Critique of the Cartesian Approach
    GNOSI: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Human Theory and Praxis, Vol. 1(2) (2018) (DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/10.5281/zenodo.3463785) O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E The Problem of Mind-Body Dichotomy: A Critique of the Cartesian Approach John Gabriel Mendie | Udofia, Stephen Nwanaokuo 1P.hD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, University of Calabar, Cross River State. 2 Department of Philosophy, University Of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. Abstract: The mind-body problem is a perennial philosophical problem that seeks to uncover the relationship or causal interaction that exists between the corporeal and incorporeal aspects of the human person. It thrives under the assumption that the human person is made up of two distinct entities, that is, mind and body, which explains their assumed causal relation. As attractive as this may seem, not all philosophers agree to this feigned idea of interaction and bifurcation of the human person. One philosopher of note, who sorts to address this problem in the 17th century, is René Descartes. For Descartes, minds and bodies are distinct kinds of substance, where bodies are spatially extended substances (a res extensa) and minds are unexpended substances characterised primarily by thought (a res cogitans). But, if minds and bodies are radically dissimilar, how could they causally interact? This paper therefore attempts to examine the philosophical foundations of Cartesian dualism. It also articulates the major arguments adopted by Descartes through his methodic doubts to address the mind- body problem. The paper concludes by highlighting some fundamental criticisms of Cartesian Interactionism in the light of recent trends in parapsychology and neuro-scientific research.
    [Show full text]
  • Análisis Filosófico ISSN: 0326-1301 ISSN: 1851-9636 [email protected] Sociedad Argentina De Análisis Filosófico Argentina
    Análisis Filosófico ISSN: 0326-1301 ISSN: 1851-9636 [email protected] Sociedad Argentina de Análisis Filosófico Argentina Briceño, Sebastián G. E. Moore on Concepts and Judgment* Análisis Filosófico, vol. 41, núm. 1, 2020, -, pp. 91-117 Sociedad Argentina de Análisis Filosófico Buenos Aires, Argentina DOI: https://doi.org/10.36446/af.2021.357 Disponible en: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=340067606004 Cómo citar el artículo Número completo Sistema de Información Científica Redalyc Más información del artículo Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina y el Caribe, España y Portugal Página de la revista en redalyc.org Proyecto académico sin fines de lucro, desarrollado bajo la iniciativa de acceso abierto DOI: 10.36446/af.2021.357 G. E. MOORE ON CONCEPTS AND JUDGMENT* G. E. Moore sobre conceptos y juicio SEBASTIÁN BRICEÑO a https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3040-4869 [email protected] a Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Santiago, Chile Abstract In “The Nature of Judgment” (1899), G. E. Moore defends the strange thesis according to which “[i]t seems necessary… to regard the world as formed of concepts”. Philosophers have offered distinct understandings of this proposal, in particular of what Moorean concepts really are. In this article I discuss and reject three of them: one, according to which Moorean concepts are universals within the framework of a bundle theory of concrete particulars (Nelson, 1962; Baldwin, 1990); a second one, according to which Moorean concepts are particulars within a mereological framework of analysis (Bell, 1999); and a third one, according to which Moorean concepts are a sui generis category, resulting from his alleged rejection of the substance (particular)/attribute (universal) distinction (MacBride, 2018).
    [Show full text]
  • Spinoza's Bundle Analysis of Substances Having
    Laboratorio – Michael A. Istvan Jr. SPINOZA’S BUNDLE ANALYSIS OF SUBSTANCES HAVING ATTRIBUTES Michael A. ISTVAN Jr. (Austin Community College) Abstract: Considered in its absolute nature, Spinoza’s God is nothing more than the total collection of self-sufficient attributes. God is nothing more than the total collection of self- sufficient attributes in the sense that no attribute is a function of anything ontologically prior to it, and whatever may be in excess to the attributes is entirely a function of the attributes themselves. My bundle interpretation of the substance-attribute relationship in Spinoza’s thought harmonizes, so I argue in this paper, with various Spinozistic positions said to be in tension with it: God’s simplicity and nonderivativeness, the «sameness» of God’s attributes, the unity of parallel modes of different attributes, our being able to know God by knowing just one of his attributes, and so on. Through the help of mapping out how God’s attributes relate to one another in terms of Suárez’s famous taxonomy of distinctions, I explain, moreover, how my interpretation provides solutions to certain famous criticisms of Spinoza’s philosophy, perhaps most importantly Leibniz’s objection to Spinoza’s ontological argument and Tschirnhaus’s puzzlement over Spinoza’s claim that Thought is the same as any other attribute even though it is more replete than any other attribute. Keywords: Spinoza; Substance-attribute relationship; Bundle theory; Substratum; God. 1. Introductory remarks Any thoughtful consideration of Spinoza’s metaphysics demands an understanding of the substance-attribute relationship in his thought. Elsewhere I have argued that Spinoza endorses a constituent analysis of substances having attributes, an interpretation simply according to which the attributes of substances are ontologically authentic or, as it is commonly put, objective1.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquinas on Substance
    AQUINAS ON SUBSTANCE: A DEFENSE OF HYLEMORPHISM AGAINST CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTS OF SUBSTANCE A Thesis by CHRISTOPHER OSTERTAG Submitted to the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Chair of Committee, Robert Garcia Committee Members, Christopher Menzel Ken Dykema Head of Department, Theodore George May 2016 Major Subject: Philosophy Copyright 2016 Christopher Ostertag ABSTRACT Theories of substance have dominated much of the literature in metaphysics. Today, there are two prominent accounts of substance: bare particularism and bundle theory. Both theories are attractive for different reasons, yet both have serious problems. While bare particularism and bundle theory enjoy preference in the literature on substance, I think that hylemorphism and the metaphysics of substance formulated by Aristotle and adopted by Saint Thomas Aquinas is an attractive view for two reasons: (1) its ability to account for both substantial and accidental change, and (2) its ability to account for the teleological nature of substance. To account for substantial change, hylemorphism makes a distinction between different types of form and matter. In substantial change, the substantial form of a substance is destroyed and replaced with a new substantial form. The subject of this change is prime matter. In accidental change, an accidental form is replaced by a new accidental form and the subject of this change is secondary matter, or the substance itself. Furthermore, a substance can also be understood as a composite of essence and accidents. By postulating an essence distinct from its accidents, hylemorphism can explain how substances are internally unified and directed towards a range of characteristic ends.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relation of Compresence in the Bundle Theory: Four Problems
    Percipi 2 (2008): 49–65 ISSN 1995-8307 The Relation of Compresence in the Bundle Theory: Four Problems Christopher Austin Indiana University [email protected] Abstract There are many things that the bundle theory of objects is thought to accomplish—an explication of the more exact “composition” or make-up of existent substances, the truth-making scheme for propositions and perhaps even an ontological foundation for property theory. The aim of this paper is to carefully examine certain issues which follow from the independence of properties and the nature of compresence to see whether or not these two axioms can be held simultaneously. For if properties are independent entities, compresence is required. Likewise, if compresence is a fact about the metaphysical make-up of entities, the primacy of properties must be maintained. This paper will examine four distinct potential problems for the bundle theory of substance by focusing on the compresence relation— these are what I will term the founding problem, the de re problem, the character problem and the agential aspect problem. After laying out each problem, this paper will offer some putative defenses from the bundle the- ory and lend rejoinders to them. This paper will conclude that no version of the bundle theory so far advanced is able to successfully answer all four of these objections and that therefore either the theory must be conceptually expanded and revised or rejected. Keywords: Substance, Properties, Bundle theory, Compresence relation Introduction There are many things that the bundle theory of objects is thought to accom- plish: an explication of the more exact “composition” or make-up of existent Submitted: 05.17.2008; Revised: 08.24.2008; Published: 08.28.2008 Article c 2008 Christopher Austin Stable URL: http://www.personal.ceu.hu/percipi/archive/200802/05_ca.pdf 50 CHRISTOPHER AUSTIN substances, the truth-making scheme for propositions and perhaps even an onto- logical foundation for property theory.
    [Show full text]