Is Psychology What Matters in Survival?

1Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

According to the Psychological-Continuity Account of What Matters, you are justified in having special concern for the well-being of a person at a future time if and only if that person will be psychologically continuous with you as you are now. On some versions of the account, the psychological continuity is required to be temporally ordered, whereas, on other versions, it is allowed to be temporally unordered. In this paper, I argue that the account is implausible if the psychological continuity is allowed to be temporally unordered. I also argue that, if the psychological continuity is required to be temporally ordered, it cannot plausibly be purely psychological (in the sense that the psychological continuity is not required to be caused through spatio-temporal continuity of a brain). The upshot is that no plausible version of the Psychological-Continuity Account of What Matters is purely psychological. So, psychological continuity is not what matters in survival.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gustafsson, J. E. (2021). Is Psychology What Matters in Survival? Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 99(3), 504–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2020.1791193

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free