本文關(guān)鍵詞： 隨附性 精神因果 功能還原模型 排他性論證 說明裂縫 物理主義　出處：《華中科技大學(xué)》2016年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：“接近充足的物理主義”是否真的足夠充足?這是本文所要討論的問題。接近充足的物理主義是對(duì)金在權(quán)心靈哲學(xué)思想最準(zhǔn)確的表達(dá),我們可以從兩個(gè)方面來理解它：首先,金在權(quán)是一個(gè)物理主義者,所以他的基本立場是,世界的內(nèi)容全部都是物理的,物質(zhì)存在是所有的存在,除了物質(zhì)存在,(本體上)再無其它存在。其次,“接近充足的”就意味著是不完全的,金在權(quán)的意思是,在這個(gè)世界中,存在著物理主義無法還原的東西。但是,金在權(quán)認(rèn)為,那些不能被還原的東西并不會(huì)威脅到物理主義,我們?nèi)匀豢梢砸回灥膱?jiān)持物理主義,并且物理主義在指導(dǎo)我們的認(rèn)識(shí)和實(shí)踐活動(dòng)上,不會(huì)有任何不足。本文研究金在權(quán)心靈哲學(xué)思想的整體。從整體上說,我們把他的思想分為兩個(gè)階段：早期思想和定型時(shí)期思想。在早期他主要關(guān)注的隨附性概念,包括對(duì)隨附性概念的定義、性質(zhì)研究和一些問題的澄清�！半S附性”是一個(gè)比較新的概念,上世紀(jì)末才進(jìn)入心靈哲學(xué)家的視野中,在上世紀(jì)的最后二十年,隨附性概念得到了非常充分的討論。在這些討論中,金在權(quán)的成果是比較顯眼的。到了定型時(shí)期,金在權(quán)關(guān)注的主要問題發(fā)生了轉(zhuǎn)變,變成了精神因果和還原論,這是我們將他的思想分為兩個(gè)時(shí)期的原因之一。精神因果和還原論的關(guān)系可以被理解為,精神因果是金在權(quán)關(guān)注的主要問題,還原論是他對(duì)問題的回答。精神因果的問題可以被總結(jié)為：精神因果何以可能?金在權(quán)的回答可以被歸結(jié)為：把精神因果還原為物理因果,二者是同一的。我們將他的思想分為兩個(gè)時(shí)期的另一個(gè)原因是,關(guān)于精神因果的本質(zhì),他的看法發(fā)生了明顯的轉(zhuǎn)變。他早期也討論過精神因果,只是精神因果問題在他早期研究中處于比較邊緣的位置。這種轉(zhuǎn)變表現(xiàn)在兩個(gè)方面：一方面他早期認(rèn)為精神因果是隨附因果,定型時(shí)期則認(rèn)為精神因果可被還原,這是觀點(diǎn)上的轉(zhuǎn)變；另一方面,他定型時(shí)期批評(píng)了自己在早期的觀點(diǎn),這是態(tài)度上的轉(zhuǎn)變。至于說這個(gè)分期的界限,我們認(rèn)為從時(shí)間上說是1990年左右。因?yàn)檫@種轉(zhuǎn)變是逐漸發(fā)生的,所以只可能給出一個(gè)大致的時(shí)間范圍。更重要的區(qū)分是從思想主張上的,以排他性論證的完成為標(biāo)志,最遲可以推到《非還原物理主義關(guān)于精神因果的困境》(1993年)。本文共五章(緒論不算),第一章主要介紹他早期的思想,即隨附性。第二到四章主要介紹他定型時(shí)期的思想,其中第二章以排他性論證為主,第三、四章介紹他為功能還原模型辯護(hù)的過程。第五章是我們對(duì)他的反思,回答“是否足夠充足的問題”,我們的觀點(diǎn)是：形式上是足夠充足的,但是實(shí)際上還不夠。
[Abstract]:Is "near sufficient physicalism" really sufficient? This is the problem discussed in this paper. Close to sufficient physicalism is the most accurate expression of Jin Zaiquan's philosophy of mind and mind. We can understand it from two aspects: first, Jin Zaiquan is a physicalist. So his basic position is that the content of the world is all physical, the physical being is all existence, and there is no other being except the physical existence. Secondly, "close to adequacy" means that it is incomplete. Jin Zaiquan means that in this world there is something that physicalism cannot restore. However, Kim believes that those things that cannot be restored do not threaten physicalism, and that we can still stick to physicalism all the time. And there will be no shortage of physicalism in guiding our understanding and practical activities. This paper studies the whole of Jin Zaiquan's philosophy of mind. On the whole, We divide his thoughts into two stages: early thought and stereotyped thought. In the early days, his main concern was the concept of subsidiarity, including the definition of the concept of subsidiarity. Nature studies and clarification of some questions. "attachment" is a relatively new concept that entered the field of mind philosophers at the end of 0th century, in the last two decades of 0th century, The concept of subsidiarity was fully discussed. In these discussions, the results of Jin Zin-kuan were quite conspicuous. In the formative period, the main issues of concern to Jin Zaiquan were transformed into spiritual causality and reductionism. This is one of the reasons why we divide his thoughts into two periods. The relationship between spiritual causality and reductionism can be understood to mean that spiritual causality is the main concern of Jin Zaiquan. Reductionism is his answer to the question. The question of spiritual causality can be summed up as: how can spiritual causation be possible? Jin Zaiquan's answer can be summed up as: the spiritual causality is reduced to physical causality, and the two are the same. Another reason why we divide his thought into two periods is that about the nature of spiritual causality. There's been a clear shift in his view. He talked about mental causes and consequences earlier, This change is manifested in two aspects: on the one hand, he thought that spiritual causation was accompanied by causality, while in the stereotypical period he thought that spiritual causation could be reduced. This was a change of opinion; on the other hand, he criticized his early views during the formative period, which was a change in attitude. We think it is about 1990 in time. Because this change is taking place gradually, it is only possible to give a general time frame. The more important distinction is from the ideological point of view, marked by the completion of exclusive argument. "the dilemma of non-reductive physicalism on spiritual causality" (1993). This paper consists of five chapters (introduction, chapter one mainly introduces his early thoughts, that is, attachment, and chapters two to four mainly introduce his thoughts during the formative period. The second chapter is mainly exclusive argument, the third, fourth chapter introduces his defense process for the functional reduction model. Chapter 5th is our reflection on him, answering the question of "is sufficient enough", our view is: formally sufficient enough, But it's not really enough.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：N02
，

本文編號(hào)：1546656