These are excerpts and elaborations from my book "The Nature of Consciousness"
Supervenience There exist two main brands
of dualism: "substance" dualism (the mind is a different substance
altogether from the brain), and "property" dualism. According to the
latter, the mind is the same substance as the brain, but comes from a class of
properties that are exclusive of the brain. The main version of property dualism is
"supervenience" theory. "Supervenience" is
used to express the fact that a domain is fully determined by another domain.
For example, biological properties "supervene" (or "are
supervenient") on physical properties, because the biological properties
of a system are determined by its physical properties. Biological and physical
properties of an organism are different sets of properties, but the physical
ones determine the biological ones. Nonetheless, one can study only the
biological properties and never deal with the physical ones. The Korean-born philosopher
Jaegwon Kim (“Concepts of Supervenience,” 1984) applied the concept to mind:
mental properties are supervenient on physical (neural) properties. According
to Kim, then, the mental is supervenient on the physical just like the
macroscopic properties of objects supervene on their microscopic structures.
Intuitively this means that mind is to brain what lightning is to electrically
charged particles: the same phenomenon, that presents itself in two different
ways. Kim's supervenience defines
a relationship between mental and physical, and it also defines some
constraints. A mental state cannot correspond to two different physical states.
Two brains can't be in the same mental state and be in different physical
states. Mental states depend on corresponding neural states: any change in
mental states must be matched by a corresponding change in physical states.
Mental states "are" neural states, the same way that electricity
"is" electrons. One can organize nature in a
hierarchy, starting with elementary particles and ending with consciousness. At
each level some properties apply, but at the immediately higher level some
other properties apply. For example, electrons have mass and spin, but
electricity has potential and intensity. Chemical compounds have density and
conductivity, whereas biological organisms have growth and reproduction. At
each level a new set of properties "emerge": the weak force at the
elementary particle level, viscosity at the molecular level, metabolism at the
biological level, and so forth; and consciousness at the cognitive level. The British philosopher
Charles Dunbar Broad had already showed in the 1920s
that the universe is inherently layered and that each layer yields the
following layer but cannot explain the new properties that emerge with it. Supervenience takes it for granted that nature works this way, but
offers no explanation of why, at a higher level, we would find electricity
instead of, say, “huicity” or “flowixity” (imaginary properties): why and how
just those properties? Why and how does the mind emerge from the brain? Ultimately,
this is the dilemma of "mental causation": how does the brain cause
the mind? In general, this is the dilemma of "second-order
properties": how do properties at one level cause properties at another
level? John Searle (who believes that minds are
high-level features of brains) admits supervenience to the extent that it is
causal: the same neural states are also the same mental states because the
former cause the latter. Searle thus reduces supervenience to
causality. But Kim does not impose any causal relationship: the relationship
between the mental and the neural is analogous to the relationship between the
usefulness of an object and the features that make it useful: those features do
not "cause" its usefulness, they "constitute" its
usefulness. All facts of the universe
depend (and are therefore supervenient) on physical facts, but the nature of
such "dependence" is not trivial, according to the Australian
philosopher David Chalmers. Properties that are supervenient on the physical world can normally
be reduced to it (i.e., explained in terms of it), but consciousness is not
truly, completely supervenient on the neural, and therefore it cannot be
reduced to the neural. Consciousness is to some extent supervenient on the
physical, but (by the nature of its kind of supervenience) it cannot be
explained in physical terms. Back to the beginning of the chapter "Mind and Matter" | Back to the index of all chapters |