Can Mary's Qualia Be Epiphenomenal?

Res Philosophica 91 (3):503-512 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Frank Jackson (1982) famously argued, with his so-called Knowledge Argument (KA), that qualia are non-physical. Moreover, he argued that qualia are epiphenomenal. Some have objected that epiphenomenalism is inconsistent with the soundness of KA. One way of developing this objection, following Neil Campbell (2003; 2012), is to argue that epiphenomenalism is at odds with the kind of behavioral evidence that makes the soundness of KA plausible. We argue that Campbell’s claim that epiphenomenalism is inconsistent with the soundness of KA is false.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 99,210

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

More troubles for epiphenomenalism.Hans Muller - 2008 - Philosophia 37 (1):109-112.
Mad Qualia.Umut Baysan - 2019 - Philosophical Quarterly 69 (276):467-485.
Why qualia are not epiphenomenal.Hans Muller - 2008 - Ratio 21 (1):85–90.
The knowledge argument.Torin Alter - 1999 - A Field Guide to the Philosophy of Mind.
Mary’s Scientific Knowledge.Luca Malatesti - 2008 - Prolegomena 7 (1):37-59.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-09-03

Downloads
118 (#162,034)

6 months
9 (#376,877)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Daniel Lim
Duke Kunshan University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Epiphenomenal qualia.Frank Jackson - 1982 - Philosophical Quarterly 32 (April):127-136.
Physicalism.Daniel Stoljar - 2010 - New York: Routledge.
Phenomenal states.Brian Loar - 1990 - Philosophical Perspectives 4:81-108.

View all 14 references / Add more references