Identity and The Difference.

J. J. Economos

Expert InsightsPublished 1968

A discussion of Mortimer Adler's view that man is radically different from other animals because of the human power of conceptualization shown in propositional speech. This contrasts with the materialistic Identity Thesis, which, in asserting the identity of psychological and neurophysiological processes, denies that there is such a difference. The point at issue is whether human behavior requires the assumption of nonmaterial factors for explanation. If a nonmaterial cause, such as a thought, can have a material result, such as an utterance, may not a material cause result in a nonmaterial effect, such as the production of concepts? (Presented at the Conference on Philosophical Problems of Psychology in Honolulu, March 1968.) 15 pp. Ref.

Document Details

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Economos, J. J., Identity and The Difference. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1968. https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P3858.html.
BibTeX RIS

This publication is part of the RAND paper series. The paper series was a product of RAND from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.