an opening remark on AM
I would have considered much of what I think about Davidson’s 1970 “Mental Events” too obvious to say to anyone who had read the article, except that a few months ago I learned a couple of facts that made me seriously rethink what I consider to be too obvious. Apparently
- It has not been widely noted or appreciated that anomalous monism depends on a diagonal argument, and
- Everyone thinks that anomalous monism has been summarily refuted (on its own, or under the general heading of “non-reductive physicalism”).
I suspect that these facts are not unrelated.