Consider the following argument:
1. Eve’s believing that p is realized by having a token of p in her head.
2. Having a token of p in one’s head is realized by some detailed, neural state.
3. Eve’s believing that p is realized by some detailed neural state.
What’s wrong with this argument?
a. absolutely nothing
b. it equivocates on “is realized by” or the concept of realization.
c. it presupposes that “is realized by” is transitive, and that’s not so clearly true.
d. either or both of its premises are false.
e. who is “Eve” anyway?
Not only are you encouraged to pick one (or at least one) answer and
defend it, but you are also invited to use such choices as a diagnosis
for which Philosophy Department such choosers belong in. Have fun!