Which of these is NOT a need that supervenience answers as a theory of mind?1 pointThere was a need for a physicalist theory that denied reductionismMost physicalist theories were non-reductionist but required weird additions to our ontologyFunctionalism and other physicalist theories were incomplete in describing the relation between the mental and physicalThere was a need for a non-reductive theory that described the relation between the mental and physical

What are the two relata of supervenience as a general relation?1 pointsubstances and propertieshigher and lower levels of sciencetwo sets of propertiesmental states and propositional attitudesClear selection

What is the key objection to weak psychophysical supervenience?2 pointsIt shows that mental facts determine physical facts, and not the other way aroundIf two people share the same qualitative states, they must also share the same physical statesWhile it does examine how the mental and physical interact, it is an incomplete pictureIt does not really capture a dependence relation between the mental and physicalSubmitClear formThis form was created inside of Ashoka University. Report Abuse Forms

What are the two relata of supervenience as a general relation?

How do weak and strong psychophisical supervenience construe 'must' in the third condition of supervenience respectively?1 pointContinuous; discreteIntensional; extensionalContingent; necessaryLogical; actual

The belief that psychological phenomena cannot be reduced to simple elements but must be studied in their entirety is central to the school known asOptionsstructuralismfunctionalismGestalt psychologybehaviorism