A 1974 paper by Steven Savitt labeled this school of thought as radical rather than conservative, while a definition of this school by Lycan and Pappas claims that you must either accept its strong form or reject it entirely. Wilfred Sellars argued that the concepts rejected
A 1974 paper by Steven Savitt labeled this school of thought as radical rather than conservative, while a definition of this school by Lycan and Pappas claims that you must either accept its strong form or reject it entirely. Wilfred Sellars argued that the concepts rejected by this school may be culturally inherited. Steven Stich -- a former member of this school -- wrote a book subtitled "The Case Against (*) Belief" that extended this school to computational science. Paul Boghossian claimed that this school refutes itself because it rejects truth conditions but claims that certain sentences are false, while other critics note that this school's target actually has strong explanatory power and should not be abandoned despite lack of physical evidence. Expounded in writings such as Neurophilosophy, this school is most closely associated with Paul and Patricia Churchland. For 10 points, name this school in philosophy of the mind that judges theories about the mind based on how well they reduce to the biological level and rejects what it terms "folk psychology".
A 1974 paper by Steven Savitt labeled this school of thought as radical rather than conservative, while a definition of this school by Lycan and Pappas claims that you must either accept its strong form or reject it entirely.
{eliminative materialism} [accept {eliminativism}; prompt on {physicalism} or {materialism}] (6) [BA]