Where Does the Knowledge Argument Go Wrong?

IF 0.5 0 PHILOSOPHY Analisis Filosofico Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.36446/af.2023.477
Fernando Rudy Hiller
{"title":"Where Does the Knowledge Argument Go Wrong?","authors":"Fernando Rudy Hiller","doi":"10.36446/af.2023.477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In his well-known Knowledge Argument (KA) Frank Jackson attempted to show that physicalism is false by offering a case that allegedly showed that a complete physicalist description of the world leaves something crucial out, namely the phenomenal qualities of experience. Eventually Jackson himself retracted and claimed that the interesting task is to explain where and why intuition-pumping arguments against physicalism such as the KA go wrong. This is exactly the task that occupies this paper: to discuss and criticize three of the most important diagnoses of the KA’s weak points and to offer my own view about the latter. Along the way, several important but often neglected features of the KA are expounded and clarified.","PeriodicalId":40940,"journal":{"name":"Analisis Filosofico","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analisis Filosofico","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36446/af.2023.477","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In his well-known Knowledge Argument (KA) Frank Jackson attempted to show that physicalism is false by offering a case that allegedly showed that a complete physicalist description of the world leaves something crucial out, namely the phenomenal qualities of experience. Eventually Jackson himself retracted and claimed that the interesting task is to explain where and why intuition-pumping arguments against physicalism such as the KA go wrong. This is exactly the task that occupies this paper: to discuss and criticize three of the most important diagnoses of the KA’s weak points and to offer my own view about the latter. Along the way, several important but often neglected features of the KA are expounded and clarified.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
知识论证哪里出了问题?
在他著名的知识论证(KA)中,弗兰克·杰克逊试图通过提供一个案例来证明物理主义是错误的,该案例据称表明,一个完整的物理主义对世界的描述遗漏了一些至关重要的东西,即经验的现象性品质。最终,杰克逊自己收回了自己的观点,并声称有趣的任务是解释反对物理主义(如KA)的直觉论证在哪里以及为什么会出错。这正是本文所要完成的任务:讨论和批评对KA弱点的三个最重要的诊断,并就后者提出自己的观点。在此过程中,对KA的几个重要但经常被忽视的特征进行了阐述和澄清。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Analisis Filosofico
Analisis Filosofico PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Análisis Filosófico is an open access scientific journal issued by the Argentine Society of Philosophical Analysis (SADAF). Since 1981, it offers original and unpublished papers on theoretical and practical philosophy, discussions, critical studies and reviews –in Spanish, English and Portuguese– that contribute to the development of philosophical analysis. Essential conditions for publication are conceptual accuracy, precision and novelty. Its refereeing policy is based on double-blind reviews and external assessment. It is launched twice a year on May and November.
期刊最新文献
Pureza del método y práctica matemática: Desafíos y perspectivas Frege y sus circunstancias: Una interpretación de la teoría fregeana del significado Bromear como acto de habla y la relatividad lingüística del humor Fuerza, contenido y la metafísica del juicio La significancia de los casos idealizados de desacuerdo
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1