Against the Brainstem View of the Persistence of Human Animals
Tzinman (Rina)
Source: A. Blank (ed.), Animals: New Essays. Philosophia (forthcoming)
Paper - Abstract

Paper StatisticsNotes Citing this PaperDisclaimer


Author’s Abstract

  1. In this paper I will discuss Eric Olson’s account of the persistence of human animals.
  2. I will first show that Olson is committed to the view that brainstem persistence is necessary and sufficient for the persistence of human animals.
  3. I will then show flaws in the account by discussing two thought experiments.
  4. The upshot of the discussion is that any future account of human animal persistence, and thus any animalist account of our own persistence, should steer away from accounting for human persistence via the brainstem.

Comment:

Retrieved from Academia.edu, 5 August 2020

Text Colour Conventions (see disclaimer)

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2020
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)



© Theo Todman, June 2007 - Sept 2020. Please address any comments on this page to theo@theotodman.com. File output:
Website Maintenance Dashboard
Return to Top of this Page Return to Theo Todman's Philosophy Page Return to Theo Todman's Home Page