Switch to: References

Citations of:

On Kim’s exclusion principle

Synthese 169 (1):75-90 (2009)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. On the Constitutive Property Reply: Commentary on Campbell.Dwayne Moore - 2013 - Theoria 80 (1):4-25.
    For the nonreductive physicalist, behavioural effects have a complete physiological explanation and a distinct psychological explanation. In a series of papers Jaegwon Kim argues that there can be no more than a single complete and independent explanation of any one event, thereby excluding the psychological explanation. For his own part, Kim includes psychological explanations through the use of an extensional model of explanatory individuation. Numerous critics have pointed out the counterintuitive results of this extensional model of explanatory individuation. In a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Explanatory exclusion and extensional individuation.Dwayne Moore - 2009 - Acta Analytica 24 (3):211-222.
    Jaegwon Kim’s principle of Explanatory Exclusion says there can be no more than a single complete and independent explanation of any one event. Accordingly, if we have a complete neurological explanation for some piece of human behavior, the mental explanation must either be excluded, or it must not be distinct from the neurological explanation. Jaegwon Kim argues that mental explanations are not distinct from neurological explanations on account of the fact that they refer to the same objective causal relation between (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Self-forming actions, contrastive explanations, and the structure of the will.Neil Campbell - 2020 - Synthese 197 (3):1225-1240.
    Robert Kane’s libertarian theory is often attacked on the grounds that undetermined self-forming actions are not amenable to contrastive explanation. I propose that we should understand contrastive explanations in terms of an appeal to structuring causes. Doing so reveals that Kane’s claim that there can be no contrastive explanation for self-forming actions is not an unwanted implication of his appeal to indeterminism, but is actually an implication of the fact that the agent’s will is not yet appropriately structured. I then (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations