Will I ever be a Cyborg?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25206/2542-0488-2023-8-2-106-115Keywords:
animalism, human animal, biological life, organism, inorganic replacementAbstract
Eric Olson’s animalist view relies on the premise that person is not a fit candidate to be a substance concept, in Wiggins’s terminology. Instead, he claims, animal is what best serves as the answer to what we most fundamentally are and what determines our persistence conditions. Pro- posing a thought experiment concerning inorganic replacement, I aim to show that Olson’s animalist view cannot accommodate our very strong intuitions about such cases. My claim is then that animalism either fails on its own grounds or requires some tuning regarding what exactly an organism is and its persistence conditions. I will examine Matthew Li- ao’s attempt to accommodate such intuitions within an animalist view. I will also describe the basics about Olson’s animalist view but let us first look at the rough outline of my thought experiment. The essentials are as follows, the rest I will provide later, as we go along.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Non-exclusive rights to the article are transferred to the journal in full accordance with the Creative Commons License BY-NC-SA 4.0 «Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 Worldwide License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0»)