Microphysicalism and the scope of the zombie argument





philosophy of mind, zombie argument, phenomenal consciousness, physicalism, emergence


Chalmers’ (1996) zombie argument against physicalism (or ‘materialism’) about (phenomenal) consciousness supposes that every property of a composed physical system supervenes (logically) on the system’s fundamental constituents. In this paper, I discuss the significance of this supposition and I show that the philosophy of physics provides good grounds to resist it. As a result, I conclude that the zombie argument does not rule out a physicalist view of consciousness that conceives it as emergent in the sense of S-emergence (Howard, 2007). I finish by discussing some objections.

= 440 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 261 veces| | VISOR (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 8 veces|


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Reinaldo José Bernal Velásquez, Universidad Javeriana

Reinaldo Bernal hizo dos pregrados, en física y en filosofía, en la Universidad de los Andes (2000). Luego, cursó el Magister en Filosofía en la Universidad Nacional de Colombia (2005). A continuación, cursó un 'Master of Science' en filosofía e historia de la ciencia en el London School of Economics, en Londres. Finalmente, hizo un doctorado en filosofía (CNRS/ENS/Paris 1 - Panthéon Sorbonne) y el Instituto Jean-Nicod (CNRS/ENS/EHESS), en París. Obtuvo el título correspondiente en diciembre del año 2011. En 2015, en el grupo "conciencia e individualidad" dirigido por el Dr. Uriah Kriegel, y en 2016 en el grupo "dividnorm" dirigido por la Dra. Joëlle Proust. Actualmente se desempeña como profesor asistente (de planta y tiempo completo) de la Facultad de Filosofía de la Universidad Javeriana, en Bogotá. Trabaja en filosofía de la mente y en filosofía de la ciencia.


Alexander, S. (1920). Space, Time, and Deity. London: Macmillan.

Alter, T. & Nagasawa Y. (Eds.). (2015). Consciousness in the Physical World. Perspectives on Russellian Monism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bedau, M. A. & Humphreys, P. (Eds.). (2008). Emergence: Contemporary Readings in Philosophy and Science. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Bernal, R. (2012). E-physicalism. A Physicalist Theory of Phenomenal Consciousness. Frankfurt:Ontos Verlag/De Gruyter.

Bernal, R. (2016). An Emergentist Argument for the Impossibility of Zombie Duplicates. Paris: Working Papers Series - FMSH. Disponible en: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01422012v4

Block, N. (1998). On a confusion about a function of consciousness. In N. Block, O. Flanagan & G. Guzeldere (Eds.), The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Campbell, J. (2010). Control Variables and Mental Causation. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 110, 15-30.

Chalmers, D. (1996). The conscious mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chalmers, D. (2002). Consciousness and its Place in Nature. In S. Stich & T. Warfield (Eds.), Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Mind. Oxford: Blackwell.

Chalmers, D. (2010). The Character of Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chalmers, D. (2012). Constructing the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Esfeld, M. (2004). Quantum entanglement and a metaphysics of relations. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 35(4), 601-617.

Freeman, A. (Ed.) (2006). Consciousness and its place in nature. Exeter: Imprint Academic.

Howard, D. (2007). Reduction and emergence in the physical sciences: some lessons from the particle physics and condensed matter debate. In N. Murphy & W. R. Stoeger (Ed.), Evolution and Emergence: Systems, Organisms, Persons (141-157). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Humphreys, P. (2008). How Properties Emerge. In M. Bedau & P. Humphreys (Eds.), Emergence: Contemporary Readings in Philosophy and Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hüttemann, A. (2004). What’s wrong with microphysicalism? London: Routledge.

Kim. J. (1999). Making Sense of Emergence. Philosophical Studies, 95, (1-2) 3–36.

Kim, J. (2005). Physicalism, or something near enough. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Kripke, S. (1980). Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Leuenberger, S. (2009). What is Global Supervenience? Synthese, 170(1), 115—129.

Lewis, D. (1983). New Work for a Theory of Universals. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 61(4), 343–377.

Loewer, B. (2001). Review of J. Kim, Mind in a Physical World. Journal of Philosophy, 98(6), 315-324.

Macdonald, C. & Macdonald, G. (2010). Emergence in Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

McLaughlin, B. (1995). Varieties of Supervenience. In Savellos, E. & Yalcin, Ü. (Eds.), Supervenience: New Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McLaughlin, B. (1997). Emergence and Supervenience. Intellectica, 2, 25–43.

Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? Philosophical Review, 83, 435-456.

Nida-Rümelin, M. (2006). Dualist Emergentism. In B. McLaughlin & J. Cohen (Eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Mind. Oxford: Blackwell.

O’Connor, T. (1994). Emergent Properties. American Philosophical Quarterly, 31, 91–104.

Papineau, D. (2000). Thinking about Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Papineau, D. (2008). Must a Physicalist be a Microphysicalist? IN J. Hohwy & J. Kallestrup (Eds.), Being Reduced: New Essays on Reduction, Explanation, and Causation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Searle, J. (1995). The Construction of Social Reality. New York: Free Press.

Shoemaker, S. (2002). Kim on Emergence. Philosophical Studies, 108, 53-63.

Suppes, P. (2002). Representation and Invariance of Scientific Structures. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.

Teller, P. (1986). Relational Holism and Quantum Mechanics. Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 37, 71-81.

Van Cleve, J. (1990). Mind-Dust or Magic? Panpsychism Versus Emergence. Philosophical Perspectives, 4, 215-226.

Woodward, J. (2008). Mental Causation and Neural Mechanisms. En J. Hohwy and J. Kallestrup (Eds.), Being Reduced: New Essays on Reduction, Explanation, and Causation (pp. 218-262). Oxford: Oxford University Press.



How to Cite

Bernal Velásquez, R. J. (2019). Microphysicalism and the scope of the zombie argument. Estudios De Filosofía, (59), 45–64. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ef.n59a03



Original or Research articles

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.