In this chapter, I defend dual-aspect monism, and I examine it in detail. I claim that an ‘aspect’ is not a property, nor a higher-order property, and I show what role it plays in the understanding of the relationship between the mental and the physical. Close to Russellian monism, the variant of this view that I defend here claims that all entities are “phental”.
- Le Bihan B (forthcoming) Aspects in dual-aspect monism and panpsychism: a rejoinder to Benovsky. In: Philosophical investigationsGoogle Scholar
- Paul LA (2017) De se preferences and empathy for future selves. In: Philosophical perspectives 31(1):7–39Google Scholar
- Russell B (1921) The analysis of mind. Allen & Unwin, London, reprinted in 1978Google Scholar
- Strawson G (2003) Real materialism. In: Antony L, Hornstein N (eds) Chomsky and his critics; reprinted in Strawson G (ed) Real materialism and other essays. Oxford Clarendon Press, 2008Google Scholar
- Strawson G (2006) Realistic monism—why physicalism entails panpsychism. J Conscious Stud 13(10–11):3–31Google Scholar