•  317
    Reply to Lynne Rudder Baker
    Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (1): 161-166. 1999.
    In “Was I Ever a Fetus?” I argued that, since each of us was once an unthinking fetus, psychological continuity cannot be necessary for us to persist through time. Baker claims that the argument is invalid, and that both the premise and the conclusion are false. I attempt to defend argument, premise, and conclusion against her objections.
  •  1190
    The view that we are human animals, " animalism ", is deeply unpopular. This paper explains what that claim says and why it is so contentious. It then argues that those who deny it face an awkward choice. They must either deny that there are any human animals, deny that human animals can think, or deny that we are the thinking things located where we are
  •  100
    Critical notice of T. Merricks, Objects and Persons (review)
    Philosophical Books 43 (4): 292-99. 2002.
    Book reviewed in this article T. Merricks, Objects and Persons.
  •  399
    Was Jekyll Hyde?
    Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (2): 328-348. 2003.
    Many philosophers say that two or more people or thinking beings could share a single human being in a split‐personality case, if only the personalities were sufficiently independent and individually well integrated. I argue that this view is incompatible with our being material things, and conclude that there could never be two or more people in a split‐personality case. This refutes the view, almost universally held, that facts about mental unity and disunity determine how many people there ar…Read more
  •  165
    In Search of the Simple View
    In G. Gasser & M. Stefan (eds.), Personal Identity: Complex or Simple?, Cambridge University Press. forthcoming.
    Accounts of personal identity over time are supposed to fall into two broad categories: 'complex views' saying that our persistence consists in something else, and 'simple views' saying that it doesn' t. But it is impossible to characterize this distinction in any satisfactory way. The debate has been systematically misdescribed. After arguing for this claim, the paper says something about how the debate might be better characterized
  •  478
    The rate of time's passage
    Analysis 69 (1): 3-9. 2009.
    Many philosophers say that time involves a kind of passage that distinguishes it from space. A traditional objection is that this passage would have to occur at some rate, yet we cannot say what the rate would be. The paper argues that the real problem with time’s passage is different: time would have to pass at one second per second, yet this is not a rate of change. This appears to refute decisively not only the view that time passes, but any tensed theory of time
  •  84
    The Ontological Basis of Strong Artificial Life
    Artificial Life 3 29-39. 1997.
    This article concerns the claim that it is possible to create living organisms, not merely models that represent organisms, simply by programming computers. I ask what sort of things these computer-generated organisms are supposed to be. I consider four possible answers to this question: The organisms are abstract complexes of pure information; they are material objects made of bits of computer hardware; they are physical processes going on inside the computer; and they are denizens of an entire…Read more
  •  12
    Dion’s Foot
    Journal of Philosophy 94 (5): 260. 1997.