A parody of Hua's anti-multidisjunctivist argument

Analysis (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Hua recently raises an argument against multidisjunctivism about perception, that is, the conjunction of naïve realism about perception and the view that hallucinatory experiences do not share a fundamental kind. In this paper I present a parody argument against multidisjunctivism about personal identity in certain cases, and argue that both Hua's argument and mine fail. I conclude with another argument against naïve realism, and thus multidisjunctivism, about personal identity in these cases.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,247

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-11-07

Downloads
30 (#749,901)

6 months
30 (#117,396)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Personal identity.Eric T. Olson - 2002 - In Stephen P. Stich & Ted A. Warfield (eds.), Blackwell Guide to Philosophy of Mind. Blackwell.
The multidisjunctive conception of hallucination.Benj Hellie - 2013 - In Fiona Macpherson & Dimitris Platchias (eds.), Hallucination: Philosophy and Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Add more references