more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 4891

[filed under theme 17. Mind and Body / A. Mind-Body Dualism / 6. Epiphenomenalism ]

Full Idea

Epiphenomenalism is usually considered to be a form of dualism, but if we define it as the doctrine that conscious events are effects but not causes, it appears to be consistent with physicalism.

Gist of Idea

If epiphenomenalism just says mental events are effects but not causes, it is consistent with physicalism

Source

John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §4.2)

Book Ref

Perry,John: 'Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness' [MIT 2001], p.78


A Reaction

Interesting. The theory was invented to put mind outside physics, and make the closure of physics possible. However, being capable of causing things seems to be a necessary condition for physical objects. An effect in one domain is a cause in another.


The 13 ideas with the same theme [mind as by-product of matter, having no effect]:

T.H.Huxley gave the earliest clear statement of epiphenomenalism [Huxley, by Rey]
Brain causes mind, but it doesn't seem that mind causes actions [Huxley]
Consciousness is a terminal phenomenon, and causes nothing [Nietzsche]
Epiphenomenalism is like a pointless nobleman, kept for show, but soon to be abolished [Alexander,S]
Epiphenomenalism makes the mind totally pointless [Alexander,S]
If epiphenomenalism were true, we couldn't report consciousness [Kim]
If epiphenomenalism just says mental events are effects but not causes, it is consistent with physicalism [Perry]
If an epiphenomenon has no physical effects, it has to be undetectable [Dennett]
Either intentionality causes things, or epiphenomenalism is true [Fodor]
The epiphenomenal relation of mind and brain is a 'causal dangler', unlike anything else [Papineau]
Maybe minds do not cause actions, but do cause us to report our decisions [Papineau]
Functionalism defines mental states by their causal properties, which rules out epiphenomenalism [Crane]
If qualia are causally inert, how can we even know about them? [Lowe]