ion since the 1960s and a desire to achieve true physicalist explanation without being a reductionist. It is Kim's (244) view that Searle's attempt at nonreductive materialism is not valid in part because it is impossible to establish laws for mental events because they make no causal difference. Essentially, this seems to invalidate Descartes' proposition that "I think, therefore I am," which directly claims that thinking is a precondition or even a cause of being.
Kim's (254) argument against nonreductive materialism is largely based on the causal closure of the physical which says that any physical event must have a physical cause and is base
...