Why the Counterfactualist Should Still Worry About Downward Causation

Erkenntnis 80 (1):159-171 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In Zhong (Philos Phenomenol Res 83:129–147, 2011; Analysis 72:75–85, 2012), I argued that, contrary to what many people might expect, the counterfactual theory of causation will generate (rather than solve) the exclusion problem. Recently some philosophers raise an incisive objection to this argument. They contend that my argument fails as it equivocates between different notions of a physical realizer (see Christensen and Kallestrup in Analysis 72:513–517, 2012). However, I find that their criticism doesn’t threaten the central idea of my view. In this paper, I make two separate responses that appeal to two unequivocal notions of physical realizers, respectively. I aim to show that a modified argument that uses either notion would work.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-04-02

Downloads
243 (#169,287)

6 months
17 (#659,887)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Lei Zhong
Chinese University of Hong Kong

Citations of this work

Sophisticated Exclusion and Sophisticated Causation.Lei Zhong - 2014 - Journal of Philosophy 111 (7):341-360.
Semantic Normativity and Semantic Causality.Lei Zhong - 2017 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 94 (3):626-645.
An equivocation in the simple argument for downward causation.Matthew Rellihan - 2021 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 10 (4):249-256.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations