Scholarlink

<p>Russellian monism (RM) is regarded by some philosophers as a promising approach to address the mind-body problem. However, this paper argues that RM suffers from a deep epistemological limitation: its core theoretical elements—namely quiddity (the fundamental intrinsic nature of physical entities) and the factors postulated to explain macro-level consciousness—are unknowable. This dual ignorance undermines RM’s explanatory power and jeopardizes its cognitive fruitfulness. To illustrate the seriousness of such a limitation, the paper draws a methodological and structural comparison with Thomistic hylomorphism (TH), a historically prominent but ultimately sterile metaphysical system. Given that TH declined partly due to its lack of cognitive fruitfulness, a similar fate may await RM. Unless RM can overcome this epistemic deficit, it risks remaining a speculative framework, with little prospect for substantive advancement in our understanding of consciousness or the natural world.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Russellian monism: ignorance and prospects

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月1日

查看全文
  • Haoying Liu

摘要

Russellian monism (RM) is regarded by some philosophers as a promising approach to address the mind-body problem. However, this paper argues that RM suffers from a deep epistemological limitation: its core theoretical elements—namely quiddity (the fundamental intrinsic nature of physical entities) and the factors postulated to explain macro-level consciousness—are unknowable. This dual ignorance undermines RM’s explanatory power and jeopardizes its cognitive fruitfulness. To illustrate the seriousness of such a limitation, the paper draws a methodological and structural comparison with Thomistic hylomorphism (TH), a historically prominent but ultimately sterile metaphysical system. Given that TH declined partly due to its lack of cognitive fruitfulness, a similar fate may await RM. Unless RM can overcome this epistemic deficit, it risks remaining a speculative framework, with little prospect for substantive advancement in our understanding of consciousness or the natural world.