2Minimizing the BaseSo far I’ve argued that all truths are a priori scrutable from PQTI-microphysics, phenomenology, that’s-all, indexicalsHow much further can we narrow the base?Is there a principled minimal basis?
3Heuristics Heuristics for suggesting that B is scrutable from A Knowability: Knowing A enables knowing BConceivability: A without B is inconceivableAnalysis: B-expressions are approximately analyzable in terms of A-expressions.
4Conceptual Priority A heuristic for further narrowing the base Aim for conceptual priority in a baseA is conceptually prior to B when...Grasping B requires grasping A?Articulating B requires articulating A?B can be approximately defined in terms of A?
5Twin-EarthabilityA is twin-earthable when intrinsic duplicates can use A nondeferentially with different content‘water’, ‘Godel’not ‘philosopher’, ‘circle’, ‘conscious’?Arguably: Twin-earthable truths are scrutable from non-twin-earthable truths plus indexical truthsAim for non-twinearthable expressions and indexicals in the base
6MicrophysicsMicrophysical expressions are approximately analyzable, by the Carnap-Ramsey-Lewis method, in terms of observable and nomic expressionsCharge = what plays the charge roleRepeat for various theoretical termsGrounded in laws, primary and secondary quality expressions?
7Observational TruthsObservational truths involving secondary qualitiesFunctionalist view: Analyzable via and scrutable from phenomenal and causal truthse.g. redness = normal cause of red experience, or disposition to cause red experiencePrimitivist view: Not analyzable in this wayred is a primitive concept, such that red things normally cause red experiences is not a priori
8Spatiotemporal Truths Are spatiotemporal truths scrutable from nonspatiotemporal truths?Functionalist view: a priori scrutable from phenomenal and nomic truthse.g. length/distance = what causes experiences as of length/distancePrimitivist view: Not analyzable/scrutable in this way. Primitive spatiotemporal concepts.
9Spatiotemporal Twin-Earthability Spatiotemporal Twin Earth cases (Brad Thompson):Doubled Earth: Everything is twice as big. Big Oscar is a functional/phenomenal duplicate of Oscar.Claim: When Big Oscar says ‘That is two meters long’ he speaks truly.So Big Oscar refers to two meters with ‘one meter’. Suggests: ‘one meter’ = (roughly) what normally causes experiences as of one meter.
10El Greco World What about shape and relative size? El Greco World: Everything is stretched out by a factor of two on one dimension. Stretched Oscar is twice as tall as Oscar.Claim: When Stretched Oscar says ‘That is square’ he speaks truly.So his ‘square’ refers to what we call rectangles.
11Intuition PumpSay that we turn out to be in Stretched Oscar’s situation: our galaxy is stretched relative to rest of the world, macrophysical length is nonuniform with respect to microphysical length.Claim: even if so, our ordinary claims re squareness are true and experiences are veridical.We’d distinguish macrosquareness from microsquareness (etc), and hold that ‘square’ refers to macrosquareness.Even better: if fundamental physics doesn’t use spacetime (cf. the Matrix).
12Choice PointFunctionalist view: Spatiotemporal expressions are Twin-Earthable and analyzable, like color (on functionalist view):spatiotemporal properties = those properties that normally cause relevant experiencesPrimitivist view: Spatiotemporal concepts are primitive, non-Twin- Earthable, unanalyzablespatiotemporal expressions in base
13Causal and Nomic Truths Humean scrutability: Nomic truths are scrutable from non-nomic truths (e.g. spatiotemporal truths)Base involves spatiotemporal mosaic?Non-Humean view: Nomic truths are not scrutable from non-nomic truthsBase involves laws of nature?
14Conceivability Heuristic Test case: Can we conceive that all the non-nomic truths obtain and the nomic truths are different?E.g. conceivability of Giant Cosmic Coincidence worldPair of Tooley worlds with different laws of nature for uninstantiated interactions
15Which Nomic Expressions? If we need nomic expressions in the base, then which?Arguably, law (or it is naturally necessary that) is more fundamental than cause?If the world is nondeterministic, we may also need chance.
16Phenomenal TruthsType-A materialist: Phenomenal truths are a priori scrutable from physical truths (and from nomic/spatiotemporal truths?)analytic functionalist, eliminativist, ...Phenomenal realist: Phenomenal truths are not a priori scrutable from physical truths (or...)Type-B materialist, dualist, panpsychist, ...
17Analyzing Phenomenal Truths Are phenomenal concepts analyzable in some other (non-functionalist) way?Intentionalist: phenomenal redness = phenomenally representing (external, primitive?) rednessNaive realist: phenomenal redness = veridical perception of red object, or hallucination thereof?Panprotopsychist: phenomenal truths scrutable from protophenomenal truths?
18QuidditiesQuiddities: The “hidden” categorical bases of fundamental microphysical dispositionsE.g. property X plays the charge roleView 1: No quiddities distinct from rolesView 2: Numerically distinct quidditiesView 3: Substantial graspable quidditiesView 4: Substantial ungraspable quiddities
19Quiddistic Scrutability Are all quiddistic truths scrutable from role truths?Arguably yes on views 1, 2, 4 (though...)Plausibly no on view 3 (thick quidditism)View 3 involves conceptual quidditism and plausibly leads to epistemological quidditismIt’s conceivable that X plays the charge role and that Y plays that charge role
20Quiddistic Expressions If epistemological quidditism is correct, we’ll need quiddistic expressions in the basePhenomenal? (panpsychism)Protophenomenal? (panprotopsychism)Secondary qualities? (pancolorism)Other? (humility re intrinsics)
21Compression Using Laws Given determinism: boundary conditions plus laws?Given probabilistic laws: boundary conditions plus laws plus ...Specifiable using description of countable length?
23Packages Four major choice points: Spatiotemporal expressions: yes or noNomic expressions: yes or noPhenomenal expressions: yes or noQuiddities: yes or noSixteen resulting potential bases?N.B. Pluralism remains possible, depending on issues about conceptual priority.
24Sixteen Packages SNPQ, SNP, ..., S, N, P, - -: yields Newman’s problem?P: yields phenomenalism or Humean panpsychism?S: Lewis’s Humean scrutability?N: nomic structuralismMy view: NP, or NQ (with protophenomena), or perhaps NPQ
25Principled Scrutability Bases Narrow Scrutability: Base is non- TwinearthablePrimitive Scrutability: Base involves primitive conceptsAcquaintance Scrutability: Base involves objects of acquaintance (epistemically rigid concepts?)Fundamental Scrutability: Base involves metaphysical fundamentals (plus...)Structural Scrutability: Base involves relations