Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. André Hampshire's avatar

    If one is genuinely uninterested in engaging with non-human interlocutors, it is unclear why one continues to do so—especially while…

  2. Steven Hales's avatar
  3. sahpa's avatar

    Essays as coursework has never been just about engaging the argument itself. Authorship matters because it matters that the argument…

  4. André Hampshire's avatar

    If anything, this exchange illustrates the problem: judgments are being made on stylistic impressions (“this sounds like AI”) rather than…

  5. Ted Bach's avatar

    The existential threat is not to higher-ed as such but a particular (and now common) higher-ed business model: the one…

  6. Steven Hales's avatar
  7. Collin Lucken's avatar

“Kripke against materialism 2.0”?

A self-described "avid reader of the blog" writes:

I recently came upon an important piece of news I thought you might want to share with the wider philosophical community on the blog. 

Saul Kripke offered a widely known critique against materialism in Lecture III of Naming and Necessity.  However, in a recent article published in Philosophical Perspectives Adriana Renero shows that around 1979 Kripke expanded such a critique and offered a knowledge argument against materialism.  In that argument Kripke agreed with Frank Jackson’s knowledge argument and considered that "a materialist must defend not merely that any mental facts must follow from physical facts by necessity, but in addition that any mental facts follow from physical facts a priori: that the truth of everything is deducible a priori from a complete material description of the world." So, Kripke's notion of the "necessary a posteriori" as offered in Naming and Necessity would not play a role when dealing with materialism. In my view, this is a novel analysis that seems to pave the way to understand Kripke's position concerning materialism and motivates further discussion in the philosophy of mind.

Here’s a link to the article: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/share/author/VKDKEAMFXYPKBXVY2WHW?target=10.1111/phpe.12195

Comments from readers informed about these issues welcome.

 

Leave a Reply to David Chalmers Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

6 responses to ““Kripke against materialism 2.0”?”

  1. I found the paper extremely compelling, and wonder what Frank Jackson thinks about both it and Kripke's view.

  2. adriana renero’s paper on kripke’s knowledge argument is wonderful. her thorough analysis of kripke’s version of the argument (which was previously rumored but little known) is important and intriguing both for the philosophy of mind and for the history of analytic philosophy. i’m proud to have been an advisor on the project. it wouldn’t be correct to say that kripke “scooped” jackson [Ed.-as someone on another blog falsely claimed], and renero doesn’t say that. at least, if kripke scooped jackson, then both were scooped 50+ years earlier by c.d. broad, who had a version of the knowledge argument (involving a mathematical archangel who doesn’t know the smell of ammonia) in his 1925 book “the mind and its place in nature”. but each version of the argument is different and each makes a contribution, as renero’s article helps to bring out.

  3. I like the paper a lot. It's an important contribution to the debate. For what it is worth, my current view is that the only way to respond to the knowledge argument in its various forms is via a defence of a version of representationalism about perceptual experiences.

  4. Smart guy, that C. D. Broad.

  5. Indeed.

  6. Great to hear from Jackson. It's fascinating to determine, upon reading the paper, how Kripke replied to physicalist objections.

    —–
    KEYWORDS:
    Primary Blog

Designed with WordPress