Identity Theory and Falsifiability
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Identity Theory and Falsifiability. / Søgaard, Anders.
In: Acta Analytica, 2024.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Identity Theory and Falsifiability
AU - Søgaard, Anders
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - I identify a class of arguments against multiple realization (MR): BookofSand arguments. The arguments are in their general form successful under reasonably uncontroversial assumptions, but this, on the other hand, turns the table on identity theory: If arguments from MR can always be refuted by BookofSand arguments, is identity theory falsifiable? In the absence of operational demarcation criteria, it is not. I suggest a parameterized formal demarcation principle for brain state/process types and show how it can be used to identify previously unconsidered contenders for evidence for MR, e.g., binary classification, division, and sorting. For these to be actual instances of MR, the corresponding psychological kinds must be verifiably, relevantly similar. I also briefly discuss possible linguistic, behavioral, and experimental demarcation criteria for psychological kinds.
AB - I identify a class of arguments against multiple realization (MR): BookofSand arguments. The arguments are in their general form successful under reasonably uncontroversial assumptions, but this, on the other hand, turns the table on identity theory: If arguments from MR can always be refuted by BookofSand arguments, is identity theory falsifiable? In the absence of operational demarcation criteria, it is not. I suggest a parameterized formal demarcation principle for brain state/process types and show how it can be used to identify previously unconsidered contenders for evidence for MR, e.g., binary classification, division, and sorting. For these to be actual instances of MR, the corresponding psychological kinds must be verifiably, relevantly similar. I also briefly discuss possible linguistic, behavioral, and experimental demarcation criteria for psychological kinds.
U2 - 10.1007/s12136-024-00587-2
DO - 10.1007/s12136-024-00587-2
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85185944401
JO - Acta Analytica
JF - Acta Analytica
SN - 0353-5150
ER -
ID: 384490684