Hypothetical identities: Explanatory problems for the explanatory argument

Recently, several philosophers have defended an explanatory argument that supposedly provides novel empirical grounds for accepting the type identity theory of phenomenal consciousness. They claim that we are justified in believing that the type identity thesis is true because it provides the best explanation for the correlations between physical properties and phenomenal properties. In this paper, I examine the actual role identities play in science and point out crucial shortcomings in the explanatory argument. I show that the supporters of the argument have failed to show that the identity thesis provides a satisfactory explanation for the correlations between physical and phenomenal properties. Hence, the explanatory argument, as it stands, does not provide new grounds for accepting the type identity theory.     

Robust realism for the life sciences

Synthese - Although scientific realism is the default position in the life sciences, philosophical accounts of realism are geared towards physics and run into trouble when applied to fields such as...     

Interventionism and Supervenience: A New Problem and Provisional Solution

The causal exclusion argument suggests that mental causes are excluded in favour of the underlying physical causes that do all the causal work. Recently, a debate has emerged concerning the possibility of avoiding this conclusion by adopting Woodward's interventionist theory of causation. Both proponents and opponents of the interventionist solution crucially rely on the notion of supervenience when formulating their positions. In this article, we consider the relation between interventionism and supervenience in detail and argue that importing supervenience relations into the interventionist framework is deeply problematic. However, rather than reject interventionist solutions to exclusion wholesale, we wish to propose that the problem lies with the concept of supervenience. This would open the door for a moderate defence of the interventionist solution to the exclusion argument.     

A comparison of selected Rorschach variables of violent female offenders and female non-offenders

A national sample of incarcerated violent female offenders (N = 45) and a sample of female non-offenders (N = 30) were compared on nine selected Rorschach CS (Exner, 2003) variables and three of the aggression variables of Gacono and Meloy (1994). The results indicate that an avoidant and inconsistent coping style was more characteristic of the offenders than the non-offenders. The offenders were characterized by social immaturity and limited capacities to cope with stress as compared with the non-offenders. No significant differences were found between the two groups in handling intense emotions. Although the aggressive scores revealed no discrimination between the groups, significant correlations were found between the aggressive content score and childhood victimization. An inverse relation was found between the aggressive past score and the emotional intensity of the violent offense. The study indicates that the selected RCS variables related to adaptive resources for coping discriminate between violent offenders and non-offenders, but that the variables related to affective features need further examination.     

Optimistic,Approach-oriented,and Avoidance Strategies in Social Situations: Three Studies on Loneliness and Peer Relationships

The aim of the three studies was to examine the extent to which the cognitive and behavioural strategies young adults apply in social situations are associated with their subsequent feelings of loneliness, their peer relationships, and social behaviour. In Study 1, 303 young adults first filled in the Strategy and Attribution Questionnaire (SAQ) and, 1 year later, the revised UCLA Loneliness scale. In Study 2, 71 young adults filled in first the SAQ and, 4 months later, the UCLA Loneliness scale and a sociometric questionnaire measuring popularity and unpopularity. In Study 3, 35 young adults who had participated in Study 1 were rated by student tutors according to their social behaviour in an academic group situation. The results showed that the less optimistic the subjects were, the less they applied an approach-oriented strategy, and the more they used a social avoidance strategy, the more lonely they were. Furthermore, the more they used an approach-oriented strategy and the less they reported social avoidance, the more successful they were in their peer relationships. These two strategies were also associated with the ways in which an observer perceived their behaviour in a group situation, whereas social optimism was not.