Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-656
Authors: | Haug, Oliver Jung, Marius F. |
Title: | Are there counterexamples to the immunity principle? : Some restrictions and clarifications ; a commentary on Caleb Liang |
Online publication date: | 24-Oct-2016 |
Year of first publication: | 2015 |
Language: | english |
Abstract: | Our commentary focuses on the sense of experiential ownership and its implications for the Immunity Principle. In general we think that Liang elaborates the self-as-object and the self-as-subject in an interesting and refreshing way. Nevertheless, there are some problems that we want to address. (1) First, we argue that the sense of experiential ownership cannot misrepresent the fact of experiential ownership. (2) Second, we argue that neither the sense of experiential ownership in particular nor phenomenal states in general are eligible for identity judgments. (3) Then we claim that the two alleged counterexamples actually do not provide any valid argument against IEM. (4) We close by evaluating whether it makes sense to talk about the Immunity Principle as a non-trivial property, or whether the relevant properties are just mispredication or misguided reference. |
DDC: | 100 Philosophie 100 Philosophy |
Institution: | Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz |
Department: | FB 05 Philosophie und Philologie |
Place: | Mainz |
ROR: | https://ror.org/023b0x485 |
DOI: | http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-656 |
URN: | urn:nbn:de:hebis:77-publ-550005 |
Version: | Published version |
Publication type: | Buchbeitrag |
License: | In Copyright |
Information on rights of use: | https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ |
Citation: | Open MIND Metzinger, Thomas |
Pages or article number: | Kap. 24(C) |
Publisher: | MIND Group |
Publisher place: | Frankfurt am Main |
Issue date: | 2015 |
Publisher URL: | http://dx.doi.org/10.15502/9783958570467 |
Publisher DOI: | 10.15502/9783958570467 |
Appears in collections: | JGU-Publikationen |