, Volume 64, Issue 2, pp 177–191 | Cite as

Physicalism in an Infinitely Decomposable World

  • Barbara Montero


Might the world be structured, as Leibniz thought, so that every part of matter is divided ad infinitum? The Physicist David Bohm accepted infinitely decomposable matter, and even Steven Weinberg, a staunch supporter of the idea that science is converging on a final theory, admits the possibility of an endless chain of ever more fundamental theories. However, if there is no fundamental level, physicalism, thought of as the view that everything is determined by fundamental phenomena and that all fundamental phenomena are physical, turns out false, for in such a world, there are no fundamental phenomena, and so fundamental phenomena determine nothing. While some take physicalism necessarily to posit a fundamental level, here I present a thesis of physicalism that allows for its truth even in an infinitely decomposable world.


Fundamental Theory Fundamental Level Final Theory Fundamental Phenomenon Endless Chain 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bohm, D. 1957Causality and Chance in Modern PhysicsRoutledge & Kegan PaulLondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Brandom, R. 1994Making it Explicit: Reasoning, Representing and Discursive CommitmentHarvard University PressCambridge, MassGoogle Scholar
  3. Chalmers, D. 1996The Conscious MindOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Chomsky, N. 1993Language and ThoughtMoyer BellRhode IslandGoogle Scholar
  5. Chomsky, N. 1995‘Language and Nature’Mind104161Google Scholar
  6. Hempel, C. 1980‘Comments on Goodman’s Ways of Worldmaking’Synthese45193199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kim, J. 1998Mind in a Physical WorldMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  8. Levine, J. 2001Purple Haze: The Puzzle of ConsciousnessOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Loewer, B. 2001‘From Physics to Physicalism’Gillet, C.Loewer, B. eds. Physicalism and Its DiscontentsCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Lycan, W.: 2003, ‘Chomsky on the Mind-Body Problem’, in L. Anthony and N. Hornstein (eds.) Chomsky and his CriticsGoogle Scholar
  11. Melnyk, A. 2003A Physicalist Manifesto: Thoroughly Modern MaterialismCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Montero, B. 1999.‘The Body Problem’Noûs33183200Google Scholar
  13. Montero, B. 2001‘Post-Physicalism’Journal of Consciousness Studies86180Google Scholar
  14. Montero, B.: 2004, ‘Consciousness is Puzzling, but Not Paradoxical’, Philosophy and Phenomenological ResearchGoogle Scholar
  15. Montero, B.: 2005, ‘What Is the Physical’? in B. McLaughlin and A. Beckermann (eds.), Oxford Handbook in the Philosophy of Mind, Oxford University Press, Oxford (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  16. Papineau, D. 2002Thinking About ConsciousnessOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Redhead, M. 1995From Physics to MetaphysicsCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Schaffer, J. 2003‘Is There a Fundamental Level’Noûs37498517Google Scholar
  19. Smart, J. 1978‘The Content of Physicalism’Philosophical Quarterly28339341Google Scholar
  20. Spurrett, D., Papineau, D. 1999‘A Note on the Completeness of Physics’Analysis592529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Weinberg, S. 1992Dreams of a Final TheoryPantheon BooksNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Wilson, J. ‘Supervenience Formulations of Physicalism’, Noûs (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  23. Wimsatt, W.: 1994, ‘The Ontology of Complex Systems: Levels of Organization, Perspectives, and Causal Thickets’, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Supp. 20Google Scholar
  24. Witmer, G. 2001‘Sufficiency Claims and Physicalism: A Formulation’Gillet, C.Loewer, B. eds. Physicalism and its DiscontentsCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Barbara MonteroNew YorkUnited States

Personalised recommendations