more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 14909

[filed under theme 7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 6. Physicalism ]

Full Idea

There is part-whole physicalism, that everything is exhausted by basic constituents that are themselves physical, or supervenience or levels physicalism, that the putatively non-physical is dependent on the physical.

Gist of Idea

Physicalism is 'part-whole' (all parts are physical), or 'supervenience/levels' (dependence on physical)

Source

J Ladyman / D Ross (Every Thing Must Go [2007], 1.3)

Book Ref

Ladyman,J/Ross,D: 'Every Thing Must Go' [OUP 2007], p.41


A Reaction

The cite Hüttemann and Papineau 2005. I am not convinced by this distinction. Ladyman and Ross oppose the first one. I'm thinking the second one either collapses into the first one, or it isn't physicalism. Higher levels are abstractions.


The 60 ideas from 'Every Thing Must Go'

The idea of composition, that parts of the world are 'made of' something, is no longer helpful [Ladyman/Ross]
There is no reason to think our intuitions are good for science or metaphysics [Ladyman/Ross]
We should abandon intuitions, especially that the world is made of little things, and made of something [Ladyman/Ross]
Modern metaphysics pursues aesthetic criteria like story-writing, and abandons scientific truth [Ladyman/Ross]
Why think that conceptual analysis reveals reality, rather than just how people think? [Ladyman/Ross]
Quantum mechanics seems to imply single-case probabilities [Ladyman/Ross]
In physics, matter is an emergent phenomenon, not part of fundamental ontology [Ladyman/Ross]
Science may have uninstantiated laws, inferred from approaching some unrealised limit [Ladyman/Ross]
Spacetime may well be emergent, rather than basic [Ladyman/Ross]
The supremacy of science rests on its iterated error filters [Ladyman/Ross]
Metaphysics builds consilience networks across science [Ladyman/Ross]
Progress in metaphysics must be tied to progress in science [Ladyman/Ross]
Metaphysics must involve at least two scientific hypotheses, one fundamental, and add to explanation [Ladyman/Ross]
Physicalism is 'part-whole' (all parts are physical), or 'supervenience/levels' (dependence on physical) [Ladyman/Ross]
Some science is so general that it is metaphysical [Ladyman/Ross]
Science is opposed to downward causation [Ladyman/Ross]
There is no test for metaphysics, except devising alternative theories [Ladyman/Ross]
We explain by deriving the properties of a phenomenon by embedding it in a large abstract theory [Ladyman/Ross]
Inductive defences of induction may be rule-circular, but not viciously premise-circular [Ladyman/Ross]
The theory of evolution was accepted because it explained, not because of its predictions [Ladyman/Ross]
What matters is whether a theory can predict - not whether it actually does so [Ladyman/Ross]
The doctrine of empiricism does not itself seem to be empirically justified [Ladyman/Ross]
If science captures the modal structure of things, that explains why its predictions work [Ladyman/Ross]
The Ramsey sentence describes theoretical entities; it skips reference, but doesn't eliminate it [Ladyman/Ross]
The Ramsey-sentence approach preserves observations, but eliminates unobservables [Ladyman/Ross]
In quantum statistics, two separate classical states of affairs are treated as one [Ladyman/Ross]
If spacetime is substantial, what is the substance? [Ladyman/Ross]
Relations without relata must be treated as universals, with their own formal properties [Ladyman/Ross]
The normal assumption is that relations depend on properties of the relata [Ladyman/Ross]
Physics seems to imply that we must give up self-subsistent individuals [Ladyman/Ross]
Things are abstractions from structures [Ladyman/Ross]
That there are existent structures not made of entities is no stranger than the theory of universals [Ladyman/Ross]
A belief in relations must be a belief in things that are related [Ladyman/Ross]
Maybe the only way we can think about a domain is by dividing it up into objects [Ladyman/Ross]
Causal essentialism says properties are nothing but causal relations [Ladyman/Ross]
If concrete is spatio-temporal and causal, and abstract isn't, the distinction doesn't suit physics [Ladyman/Ross]
Concrete and abstract are too crude for modern physics [Ladyman/Ross]
A metaphysics based on quantum gravity could result in almost anything [Ladyman/Ross]
Cutting-edge physics has little to offer metaphysics [Ladyman/Ross]
Two versions of quantum theory say that the world is deterministic [Ladyman/Ross]
That the universe must be 'made of' something is just obsolete physics [Ladyman/Ross]
A fixed foliation theory of quantum gravity could make presentism possible [Ladyman/Ross]
Only admit into ontology what is explanatory and predictive [Ladyman/Ross]
We say there is no fundamental level to ontology, and reality is just patterns [Ladyman/Ross]
Maybe mathematical logic rests on information-processing [Ladyman/Ross]
There is no single view of individuals, because different sciences operate on different scales [Ladyman/Ross]
The aim of metaphysics is to unite the special sciences with physics [Ladyman/Ross]
There are no cats in quantum theory, and no mountains in astrophysics [Ladyman/Ross]
Any process can be described as transfer of measurable information [Ladyman/Ross]
A sum of things is not a whole if the whole does not support some new generalisation [Ladyman/Ross]
To be is to be a real pattern [Ladyman/Ross]
Things are constructs for tracking patterns (and not linguistic, because animals do it) [Ladyman/Ross]
Maybe individuation can be explained by thermodynamic depth [Ladyman/Ross]
Causation is found in the special sciences, but may have no role in fundamental physics [Ladyman/Ross]
We treat the core of a pattern as an essence, in order to keep track of it [Ladyman/Ross]
Induction is reasoning from the observed to the unobserved [Ladyman/Ross]
Rats find some obvious associations easier to learn than less obvious ones [Ladyman/Ross]
Explanation by kinds and by clusters of properties just express the stability of reality [Ladyman/Ross]
There is nothing more to a natural kind than a real pattern in nature [Ladyman/Ross]
A continuous object might be a type, with instances at each time [Ladyman/Ross]