Is Reductionism Expressible?
Is Reductionism Expressible?
Buddhists hold that there is no self. Their view is best represented as a form of ontological reductionism. But this claim is controversial, since Buddhists do not typically put theirs as the view that a person just consists in certain other things. Instead, they explain their view by employing the notion that there are two kinds of truth. They say that while it is conventionally true that there are persons, the ultimate truth is that there are impersonal psychophysical elements in causal connection. The Buddhist view is considered reductionist because the device of the two truths represents a better way of formulating ontological reductionism. This chapter explores the objection that, if this is the correct formulation of reductionism, then reductionism will turn out to be inexpressible.
Keywords: Buddhism, reductionists, self, ontolgical reductionism, causal connection
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
