0

In his article "Eliminative materialism, cognitive suicide, and begging the question" (Metaphilosophy, Vol. 23, No. 4 (October 1992), pp. 378-392), Victor Reppert says:

The claim that there are no beliefs seems rather an obvious choice as a candidate for self-refuation. After all, you cannot say "I believe there are no beliefs" without contradicting yourself. But eliminativists, when pressed on this, do not say that they believe there are no beliefs; what they say is that they are in brain state that stands in some kind of successor relationship in the matured neuroscience to what folk psychology calls beliefs.

What, exactly does he mean by brain state that stands in some kind of successor relationship? (From the wording, it seems he is somewhat quoting those who make such claims.) Does it mean, for example: a succession of certain states of configurations of atoms (in the claim maker's brain) enabled the conclusion that ... ?

blackened
  • 453
  • 2
  • 7
  • IMO it means "we are changing our ideas..." – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Oct 02 '23 at 07:39
  • 1
    As "some kind" indicates, he (and materialists) do not mean it "exactly". But an analogy makes it clear. The folk once believed that rivers are driven by river spirits. Now we know that they are driven by gravity and water pressure instead. So gravity and water pressure are "in some kind of successor relationship" to river spirits in the "matured" hydrodynamics. Beliefs, as the folk think of them, are to be eliminated from discourse by neuroscience, just like river spirits were by hydrodynamics, and replaced by suitable brain states, just like by gravity and water pressure. – Conifold Oct 02 '23 at 07:50

0 Answers0