Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:05:22.819Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ramseyan humility: the response from revelation and panpsychism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Raamy Majeed
Raamy Majeed*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Philosophy, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
*
Email: Mra37@cam.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

David Lewis argues for Ramseyan humility, the thesis that we can’t identify the fundamental properties that occupy the nomological roles at our world. Lewis, however, remarks that there is a potential exception to this, which involves assuming two views concerning qualia (i) panphenomenalism (contemporary panpsychism): all instantiated fundamental properties are qualia and (ii) the identification thesis (revelation): we can know the identities of our qualia simply by being acquainted with them. This paper aims to provide an exposition, as well as an assessment, of this response to the humility thesis.

Keywords

Ramseyan Humilitytranscendental idealismpanpsychismrevelationqualiaphenomenal consciousness
Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 47 , Issue 1 , 2017 , pp. 75 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Journal of Philosophy 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.)

References

Alter, Torin and Nagasawa, Yujin. 2012. “What is Russellian Monism?” Journal of Consciousness Studies, 9–10. Reprinted in Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism, edited by Alter, Torin and Nagasawa, Yujin, 2015. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Armstrong, David. 1989. A Combinatorial Theory of Possibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139172226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buroker, Jill Vance. 1981. Space and Congruence: The Origins of Kant’s Idealism. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. 10.1007/978-94-015-7660-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buroker, Jill Vance. 2006. Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511809545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, David. 1996. The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chalmers, David. 2015. “Panpsychism and Panprotopsychism.” In Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism, edited by Alter, Torin and Nagasaki, Yujin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Coleman, Sam. 2008. “Mind Under Matter.” In Mind that Abides, edited by Skrbina, David, 83–107. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Damjanovic, Nic. 2012. “Revelation and Physicalism.” Dialectica 66: 69–91. 10.1111/dltc.2012.66.issue-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, Daniel. 1991. Consciousness Explained. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and London.Google Scholar
Descartes, Rene. 1641/2008. Meditations on First Philosophy: With Selections from the Objections and Replies. Translated by Moriarty, Michael. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eddington, Arthur. 1928. The Nature of The Physical World. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Goff, Philip. 2009. “Why Panpsychism doesn't Help Us Explain Consciousness.” Dialectica 63: 289–311. 10.1111/dltc.2009.63.issue-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horgan, Terry. 2004. “Jackson on Physical Information and Qualia.” In There’s Something About Mary, edited by Ludlow, Peter, Nagasawa, Yujin and Stoljar, Daniel, 301–308. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, Mark. 1992. “How to Speak of the Colors.” Philosophical Studies 68: 221–263. 10.1007/BF00694847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1781/2007. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated and edited by Guyer, Paul and Wood, Allen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kelly, Alexander. 2013. “Ramseyan Humility, Scepticism and Grasp.” Philosophical Studies 164: 705–726. 10.1007/s11098-012-9871-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kistler, Max. 2002. “The Causal Criterion of Reality and the Necessity of Laws of Nature.” Metaphysica 3: 57–86.Google Scholar
Ladyman, James, and Ross, Don. 2007. Every Thing Must Go. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199276196.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langton, Rae. 1998. Kantian Humility: Our Ignorance of Things in Themselves. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Langton, Rae. 2004. “Elusive Knowledge of Things in Themselves.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 82: 129–136. 10.1080/713659791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried. 1714/1991. Monadology. Routledge.Google Scholar
Lewis, David. 1979. “Attitudes De Dicto and De Se.” The Philosophical Review 88: 513–543. 10.2307/2184843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David. 1986. On the Plurality of Worlds. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Lewis, David. 1995. “Should a Materialist Believe in Qualia?” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 73: 140–144. 10.1080/00048409512346451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David. 1997. “Naming the Colours.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 75: 325–342. 10.1080/00048409712347931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David. 2009. “Ramseyan Humility.” In Conceptual Analysis and Philosophical Naturalism, edited by Braddon-Mitchell, David and Nola, Robert, 203–222. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Loar, Brian. 2004. “Phenomenal States.” In There’s Something About Mary, edited by Ludlow, Peter, Nagasawa, Yujin and Stoljar, Daniel, 219–240. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lockwood, Michael. 1991. Mind, Brain and the Quantum: The Compound “I”. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Luce, Arthur and Jessop, T. E. eds. 1948–57. The Works of George Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson & Sons.Google Scholar
Majeed, Raamy. 2013. “A Representationalist Argument Against Contemporary Panpsychism.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 20: 105–123.Google Scholar
Maxwell, Grover. 2002. Rigid Designators and Mind-brain Identity. In Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings, edited by Chalmer, David. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Papineau, David. 2002. Thinking about Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/0199243824.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popper, Karl. 1977. “Some Remarks on Panpsychism and Epiphenomenalism.” Dialectica 31: 177–186. 10.1111/dltc.1977.31.issue-1-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramsey, Frank. 1990. Philosophical Papers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, Dan. 2011. Idealism and their refutations. Oxford: Oxford Lecture.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gregg. 2004. A Place for Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195168143.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1927/1954. The Analysis of Matter. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1948. Human Knowledge. Its Scope and Limits. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1956. Mind and Matter. In Portraits from Memory. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Schaffer, Jonathan. 2005. “Quiddistic Knowledge.” Philosophical Studies 123: 1–32. 10.1007/s11098-004-5221-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shoemaker, Sydney. 1984. “Causality and Properties.” In Identity, Cause, and Mind, 206–233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shoemaker, Sydney. 1991. “Qualia and Consciousness.” Mind C: 507–524. 10.1093/mind/C.400.507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spinoza, Baruch. 1677/1985. “Ethics”, In The Collected Works of Spinoza, edited and translated by Curley, E., 408–620. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stoljar, Daniel. 2009. “The Argument from Revelation.” In Conceptual Analysis and Philosophical Naturalism, edited by Braddon-Mitchell, David and Nola, Robert, 113–138. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Strawson, Galen. 2006. “Realistic Monism: Why Physicalism Entails Panpsychism.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 13: 3–31.Google Scholar
Stubenberg, Leopold. 2015. “Russell, Russellian Monism, and Panpsychism.” In Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism, edited by Alter, Torin and Nagasawa, Yujin, 58–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Swoyer, Chris. 1982. “The Nature of Natural Laws.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 60 (3): 203–223. 10.1080/00048408212340641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tye, Michael. 1999. “Phenomenal Consciousness: The Explanatory Gap as a Cognitive Illusion.” Mind 108: 705–725. 10.1093/mind/108.432.705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, Alfred. 1933. Adventures of Ideas. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Whittle, Ann. 2006. “On an Argument for Humility.” Philosophical Studies 130: 461–497. 10.1007/s11098-004-5751-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worrall, John. 1989. “Structural Realism: The Best of Both Worlds?” Dialectica 43: 99–124. 10.1111/dltc.1989.43.issue-1-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar