Abstract:

Contemporary philosophy of mind is dominated by the broadly functionalist view that what is distinctive of mentality is a certain kind of causal structure. Such functionalist theories are the keystone of contemporary physicalism. I believe that causal theories are inadequate to account for mental phenomena, but that existing objections to them--while largely correct--fail to address their most basic inadequacy: the causal accounts of properties in which causal theories of mind are embedded. I draw attention to a relation of determination that is stronger than causation. That relation is grounding. Grounding is what is picked out by the English phrase 'in virtue of' in a specific range of uses. I draw out the logic of the relation through consideration of examples, and then show how it can be employed in formulating a criterion of identity for properties. This provides a framework for approaching fundamental questions about the relation between mental and physical properties. I argue that mental properties are neither identical to nor realized by physical properties, and that physicalism is thus false. The argument appeals to the special role the mind plays in determining certain normative phenomena, and the inability of physical properties to play that role. I close by defending antiphysicalism from objections concerning mental causation.