The Ontological Implication Of Anomalous Monism And Mental Causation

Generally speaking,the discussion of nature of mind traces back to Descartes' Substance Dualism.The major problem of Descartes,theory is mind-body relationship,which is studied as a form of mental-physical relationship basing on properties in contemporary philosophy of mind,or which is called the mental causation problem.In contemporary discussion context.Physicalism seems to be the best approach,and supervenience plays a crucial role in Physicalism.There are two forms of Physicalism,Reductive Physicalism and Non-reductive Physicalism.Regardless of what form is.they are both facing the mental causation problem.No matter based on substance or basing on property,these theories are under similar ontological framework.The concepts they involving,such as mind,property,causation and so on,are all clarify on ontological level.Alike this ontological presupposition,Anomalous Monism proposed by Donald Davidson puts forward another ontological framework.Anomalous Monism holds that some concepts which are presumed as ontological concepts do not have ontological status.These concepts only belong to descriptive level.There is a fierce debate about Anomalous Monism.The objections mainly focus on causal efficacy of mental properties.The objections hold that Anomalous Monism cannot explain the causal efficacy of mental properties.Although Davidson replies to the objections,and again claims his explanations about key concepts,his opponent still believe that Anomalous Monism could not be accepted.Meanwhile,some philosophers say that the controversy between Davidson and his opponent do not base on same ontological framework,therefore the controversy is meaningless.They focus on Anomalous Monism itself,and attempt to prove its ontological presupposition is inconsistent.So Anomalous Monism is problematic.Under such background,this paper attempts to clarify Anomalous Monism and its relationship with mental causation through an ontological view.This paper claims that Anomalous Monism is consistent under its ontological presupposition,and we can give a reasonable explanation to it.The debate between Davidson and his opponent is under different ontological frameworks,meanwhile the objection based on the inconsistent of Anomalous Monism's ontological presupposition is also not accepted.At last,in virtue of ideas of naturalizing metaphysics,this paper clarifies the foundation of the ontological presuppositions involved in Anomalous Monism debate,it gives a reasonable explanation about Anomalous Monism from another aspect.This paper has three chapters.The first chapter analyzes Anomalous Monism in detail,and specific Anomalous Monism debate.In chapter two I reanalyze some key concepts,and I clarify the invalidity of objections to Anomalous Monism based on it.In the last chapter,I first formulate the ontological presupposition of Anomalous Monism and the explanation of mental causation based on it.Then in virtue of naturalizing metaphysics,I clarify another ontological implication of Anomalous Monism.