How do weak and strong psychophisical supervenience construe 'must' in the third condition of supervenience respectively?1 pointContinuous; discreteIntensional; extensionalContingent; necessaryLogical; actual
Question
How do weak and strong psychophisical supervenience construe 'must' in the third condition of supervenience respectively?1 pointContinuous; discreteIntensional; extensionalContingent; necessaryLogical; actual
Solution
The terms 'weak' and 'strong' in psychophysical supervenience refer to different interpretations of the 'must' in the third condition of supervenience.
In weak psychophysical supervenience, the 'must' is construed as contingent. This means that it is possible for two beings to be identical in all physical respects but differ in some mental respects, but this does not actually happen in our world. The supervenience relation is contingent upon the laws of nature in our world, which do not allow for such a situation.
In strong psychophysical supervenience, on the other hand, the 'must' is construed as necessary. This means that it is not just that beings that are identical in all physical respects do not actually differ in any mental respects in our world; rather, they could not possibly do so in any world. The supervenience relation is not just a fact about our world, but a necessary truth.
So, the answer to your question is: Contingent; necessary.
Similar Questions
What is the key objection to weak psychophysical supervenience?2 pointsIt shows that mental facts determine physical facts, and not the other way aroundIf two people share the same qualitative states, they must also share the same physical statesWhile it does examine how the mental and physical interact, it is an incomplete pictureIt does not really capture a dependence relation between the mental and physicalSubmitClear formThis form was created inside of Ashoka University. Report Abuse Forms
What are the two relata of supervenience as a general relation?1 pointsubstances and propertieshigher and lower levels of sciencetwo sets of propertiesmental states and propositional attitudesClear selection
What are the two relata of supervenience as a general relation?
Which of these is NOT a need that supervenience answers as a theory of mind?1 pointThere was a need for a physicalist theory that denied reductionismMost physicalist theories were non-reductionist but required weird additions to our ontologyFunctionalism and other physicalist theories were incomplete in describing the relation between the mental and physicalThere was a need for a non-reductive theory that described the relation between the mental and physical
The belief that psychological phenomena cannot be reduced to simple elements but must be studied in their entirety is central to the school known asOptionsstructuralismfunctionalismGestalt psychologybehaviorism
Upgrade your grade with Knowee
Get personalized homework help. Review tough concepts in more detail, or go deeper into your topic by exploring other relevant questions.