Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-7jgsp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T01:37:27.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Valuable Could a Material Object Be?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2016

ANDREW M. BAILEY  and
JOSHUA RASMUSSEN
ANDREW M. BAILEY
Affiliation:
YALE-NUS COLLEGE, SINGAPOREwrathius@gmail.com
JOSHUA RASMUSSEN
Affiliation:
AZUSA PACIFIC UNIVERSITYjrasmussen@apu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Arguments for substance dualism—the theory that we are at least partly nonmaterial beings—abound. Many such arguments begin with our capacity to engage in conscious thought and end with dualism. Such are familiar. But there is another route to dualism. It begins with our moral value and ends with dualism. In this article, we develop and assess the prospects for this new style of argument. We show that, though one version of the argument does not succeed, there may yet be a deep problem for standard physical accounts of our nature.

Keywords

materialismsubstance dualismmetaphysicspersonal identitypersonal ontologyphilosophy of mind

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the American Philosophical Association , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , Summer 2016 , pp. 332 - 343
Copyright
Copyright © American Philosophical Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bailey, Andrew M. (n.d.) “Material Through and Through.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Ballantyne, Nathan. (2014) “Knock Down Arguments.” Erkenntnis, 79, 525–43.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, Shamik. (2015) ‘The Possibility of Physicalism’. Journal of Philosophy, 111, 557–92.Google Scholar
Chalmers, David. (2002) ‘Consciousness and its Place in Nature’. In Chalmers, D. (ed.), Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 247–72.Google Scholar
Frankfurt, Harry. (1969) ‘Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility’. Journal of Philosophy, 66, 829–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, Gerald. (2016) ‘A Moral Argument for Substance Dualism’. Journal of the American Philosophical Association, 2, 21–35.Google Scholar
Jackson, Frank. (1999) From Metaphysics to Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Leon, Felipe, and Tognazzini, Neal. (2010) ‘Why Frankfurt-Examples Don't Need to Succeed to Succeed’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 53, 551–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merricks, Trenton. (1994) ‘A New Objection to A Priori Arguments for Dualism’. American Philosophical Quarterly, 31, 81–85.Google Scholar
Moser, Paul K., and Trout, J. D.. (1995) ‘Introduction’. In Moser, P. and Trout, J. D. (eds.), Contemporary Materialism. A Reader (London: Routledge), 1–34.Google Scholar
Wilson, Jessica. (2006) ‘On Characterizing the Physical’. Philosophical Studies, 131, 61–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar