Place, Smart, and Afterimages

Abstract

This paper argues that U.T. Place and J.J.C Smart’s shared version of identity theory fails on two accounts. The first is their account of what an introspecting subject means when they report a nonveridical experience. This paper argues that the subject cannot mean what the duo claim they do – namely, that they are having an experience similar to a veridical experience – given the physicalist premises they employ. The second is their account of what a scientist can explain about the subject’s nonveridical experience through observation of their brain processes. This paper contends that a scientist cannot adequately explain all types of nonveridical experiences. The paper then investigates whether or not Place and Smart’s project would benefit from redefining reports of experiences as expressives. Lastly, it posits that Place and Smart are stuck in a sort of paradox.