Powerful qualities, the conceivability argument and the nature of the physical

Abstract

David Chalmers’ ‘conceivability’ argument against physicalism is perhaps the most widely discussed and controversial argument in contemporary philosophy of mind. Recently, several thinkers have suggested a novel response to this argument, which employs the ‘powerful qualities’ ontology of properties. In this paper, I argue that this response fails because it presupposes an implausible account of the physical/phenomenal distinction. In the course of establishing this, I discuss the so-called ‘ultimate’ argument for the claim that dispositional properties form the subject matter of physics. I argue that the ultimate argument can be interpreted in a strong or a weak way, and that the strong interpretation is implausible. I argue that this undermines the powerful qualities based response to the conceivability argument. I also argue for a general conclusion: that we should not define ‘the physical’ exclusively in terms of a distinction drawn from ontology.Thanks also to the Leverhulme Trust and the Isaac Newton Trust for an Early Career Fellowship (ECF-2015-088) that provided support while the paper was being written.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11098-016-0774-