Erkenntnis

, Volume 78, Issue 2, pp 469–485 | Cite as

Concepts of Supervenience Revisited

Original Article

Abstract

Over the last 3 decades a vast literature has been dedicated to supervenience. Much of it has focused on the analysis of different concepts of supervenience and their philosophical consequences. This paper has two objectives. One is to provide a short, up-do-date, guide to the formal relations between the different concepts of supervenience. The other is to reassess the extent to which these concepts can establish metaphysical theses, especially about dependence. The conclusion is that strong global supervenience is the most advantageous notion of supervenience that we have.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Vera Hoffmann, and to two anonymous referees of this Journal. This research was supported by the Israel Science Foundation, Grant 725/08.

References

  1. Bennett, K. (2004). Global supervenience and dependence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 68, 501–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennett, K., & McLaughlin, B. (2005). Supervenience. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. URL: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/supervenience/.
  3. Burge, T. (1979). Individualism and the mental. In P. French, T. Euhling, & H. Wettstein (Eds.), Studies in epistemology: Midwest studies in philosophy (Vol. 4). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  4. Davidson, D. (1987). Knowing one’s own mind. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 60, 441–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Donato, X., & Polanski, M. (2006). Supervenience, maximal properties and model theory. Theoria, 21, 257–276.Google Scholar
  6. Gibbard, A. (1975). Contingent identity. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 4, 187–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hoffmann, V., & Newen, A. (2007). Supervenience of extrinsic properties. Erkenntnis, 67, 305–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Horgan, T. (1982). Supervenience and microphysics. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 63, 29–43.Google Scholar
  9. Horgan, T. (1993). From supervenience to superdupervenience: Meeting the demands of a material world. Mind, 102, 555–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kim, J. (1984). Concepts of supervenience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 45, 153–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kim, J. (1987). ‘Strong’ and ‘global’ supervenience revisited. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 48, 315–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kim, J. (1989). The myth of nonreductive materialism. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 63, 31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim, J. (1990). Supervenience as a philosophical concept. Metaphilosophy, 21, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kim, J. (1998). The mind-body problem after fifty years. In A. O’Hear (Ed.), Current issues in philosophy of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Leuenberger, S. (2009). What is global supervenience? Synthese, 170, 115–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. McLaughlin, B. (1997). Supervenience, vagueness, and determination. Philosophical Perspectives, 11, 209–230.Google Scholar
  17. Moyer, M. (2008). Weak and global supervenience are strong. Philosophical Studies, 138, 125–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Paull, C. R., & Sider, T. R. (1992). In defense of global supervenience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 52, 833–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Petrie, B. (1987). Global supervenience and reduction. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 48, 119–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Putnam, H. (1975). The meaning of ‘meaning’. In K. Gunderson (Ed.), Language, mind and knowledge. Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. 7). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  21. Shagrir, O. (2002). Global supervenience, coincident entities and anti-individualism. Philosophical Studies, 109, 171–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shagrir, O. (2009a). Anomalism and supervenience: A critical survey. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 39, 237–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shagrir, O. (2009b). Strong global supervenience is valuable. Erkenntnis, 71, 417–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sider, T. R. (1999). Global supervenience and identity across times and worlds. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 59, 913–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sider, T. R. (2008). Yet another paper on the supervenience argument against coincident entities. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 77, 613–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stalnaker, R. (1996). Varieties of supervenience. Philosophical Perspectives, 10, 221–241.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Philosophy and Cognitive ScienceThe Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations