Renovating McTaggart’s Substantial Self

  • Gary L. Cesarz


It is an irony of contemporary philosophy of mind that that which does the explaining seems hell-bent on explaining itself away. Bundle theories of the self, seeking to explain it within familiar scientific parameters, tend to get tangled up in this methodological paradox. Substance theories, on the other hand, avoid losing the self, but do so at the cost of providing those who demand it no scientifically or naturalistically acceptable handle on the self—no way to analyze, manipulate and make predictions about the self. Responding to these problems, this paper explores and defends (with qualifications) McTaggart’s account of the self as a substantial person, mutually related to other substantial selves, which are all individuated from each other by determining correspondence relations among their perceptions.


Folk Psychology Primary Quality Secondary Quality Bundle Theory Theoretical Entity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aristotle (1967) Categories, H.P. Cooke trans. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  2. ———. (1968) Metaphysics, H. Tredennick trans. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  3. Berkeley, George (1988) A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge (London: Penguin Books Ltd.).Google Scholar
  4. Broad, C. D. (1976) An Examination of McTaggarts Philosophy, 2 vols. (New York: Octagon Books).Google Scholar
  5. Calkins, Mary (ed.) (1929) Berkeley: Essay, Principles, Dialogues with Selections from Other Writings (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons).Google Scholar
  6. Cesarz, Gary L. (1988) Substance and Relations in McTaggarts Metaphysics, Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Mexico.Google Scholar
  7. ———. (2005) ‘McTaggart and Broad on Leibniz’s Law,’ presented at the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Philosophical Association, New York, December 28.Google Scholar
  8. Churchland, Paul and Patricia Churchland (1990) ‘Could a Machine Think?’ in Scientific American, v. 262, no. 1.Google Scholar
  9. Churchland, Paul (1996) The Engine of Reason, the Seat of the Soul (Cambridge: MIT Press).Google Scholar
  10. Crane, Tim and Hugh Mellor (1990) ‘There is No Question of Physicalism,’ Mind, N.S., 85–206.Google Scholar
  11. Crick, Francis (1995) The Astonishing Hypothesis (New York: Simon & Schuster).Google Scholar
  12. Dennett, Daniel (1991) Consciousness Explained (Boston: Little, Brown & Company).Google Scholar
  13. Descartes, Rene (1993) The World, or Treatise on Light, and Meditations on First Philosophy, in The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, 3 vols., translated & edited by John Cottingham,, (New York: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  14. Galileo, Galilei (1957) ‘The Assayer,’ in Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo, translated & edited by Stillman Drake, (New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc.).Google Scholar
  15. Geach, Peter (1979) Truth, Love, and Immortality (Berkeley: University of California Press).Google Scholar
  16. Hegel, G.W.F. (1976) Science of Logic, A.V. Miller trans. (New York: Humanities Press).Google Scholar
  17. Hume, David (1973) A Treatise of Human Nature, Selby-Biggs (ed.) (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
  18. Kant, Immanuel (1965) Critique of Pure Reason, Kemp Smith trans. (New York: St. Martin’s Press).Google Scholar
  19. Leibniz, G.W. (1962) Basic Writings, G.R. Montgomery trans. (LaSalle: Open Court Publishing Co.).Google Scholar
  20. Locke, John (1974) An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, 2 vols. (London: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd.).Google Scholar
  21. McTaggart, J.M.E. (1901) Studies in Hegelian Cosmology (Cambridge: University Press).Google Scholar
  22. ———. (1903) ‘Some Considerations Relating to Human Immortality’ International Journal of Ethics, v. 13, no. 2.Google Scholar
  23. ———. (1968a) The Nature of Existence, 2 vols. (Grosse Pointe, Michigan: Scholarly Press).Google Scholar
  24. ———. (1968b) Philosophical Studies, S.V. Keeling (ed.) (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press).Google Scholar
  25. ———. (1969) Some Dogmas of Religion (New York: Kraus Reprint Co.).Google Scholar
  26. Montero, Barbara (1999) ‘The Body Problem,’ Nous, 33, 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. ———. (2009) On the Philosophy of Mind, (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth).Google Scholar
  28. Moore, G.E. (1959) ‘The Refutation of Idealism,’ Philosophical Studies (Paterson, NJ: Littlefield, Adams & Co.).Google Scholar
  29. Nagel, Thomas (2012) Mind and Cosmos (New York: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Royce, Josiah (1959) The World and the Individual, 2 vols. (New York: Dover Publications, Inc.).Google Scholar
  31. Russell, Bertrand (1927) Philosophy (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.).Google Scholar
  32. ———. (1952) Our Knowledge of the External World (London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd.).Google Scholar
  33. ———. (1954) The Analysis of Matter (New York: Dover Publications, Inc.).Google Scholar
  34. ———. (1960) An Outline of Philosophy (New York: Meridian Books).Google Scholar
  35. ———. (1971) Logic & Knowledge: Essays 1901–1950, R. Marsh (ed.) (New York: Capricorn Books).Google Scholar
  36. Searle, John (1990) ‘Is the Brain’s Mind a Computer Program?’ in Scientific American, v. 262, no. 1.Google Scholar
  37. ———. (2008) ‘The Self as a Problem in Philosophy and Neurobiology,’ Philosophy in a New Century: Selected Essays, (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  38. Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1971) Philosophical Investigations (New York: Macmillan Company).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gary L. Cesarz
    • 1
  1. 1.Southeast Missouri State UniversityCape GirardeauUSA

Personalised recommendations