Article contents
Causation, supervenience, and special sciences
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 March 2005
Abstract:
Ross & Spurrett (R&S) argue that Kim's reductionism rests on a restricted account of supervenience and a misunderstanding about causality. I contend that broadening supervenience does nothing to avoid Kim's argument and that it is difficult to see how employing different notions of causality helps to avoid the problem. I end by sketching a different solution.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004
- 1
- Cited by