Talk:Jaegwon Kim

Expansion and clean up
I recently added some stuff and cleaned the article up a bit. However, it can still use some clean up and expansion: - Jaymay 05:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * There is definitely more to add to the "Work" section. There's some info already about his philosophy of mind and events, but he has other work too that should be highlighted.
 * I think that the section on events should be cleaned up and have references to his work as well. (Just saying where he states certain views would be good.)
 * Adding more of his major publications would be good too, especially his major articles.

Misc edits
I added a small amount of information to make the entry more acceptable. I didn't start the entry, but I had just come looking for info about Kim.--KWW

Removed a publication "Mental Causation" (this presumably is John Heil's book which someone mistook for a non-existent book by JK).--Thinkingthing 00:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed description of Kim as an American philosopher. Although he works in the USA, he is, I believe, Korean. Also removed mention at the beginning of the article of Kim's current position as this is later mentioned in the CV. Added a list of key themes in Kim's work and sketched a developement of Kim's ideas regarding the mind-body problem.--Thinkingthing


 * He's been an American citizen for many years and has, in fact, lived in the U.S. for far longer than he ever lived in South Korea. I think describing him as an American philosopher is probably correct. -- justinlkim (16 March 2007)

Adding Korean interview question
On March 4, 2008, Korean newspaper, JoongAng Ilbo interviewed Jaegwon Kim about physicalism, qualia, psychology of human and animals, language and Turing machine. I think the article contains interesting Kim's ideas which are absent in the Wiki article. Though I am not sure how to reference Korean article. How do I do that? --- stampit (18 March, 2008)

section 2.2 - relationship to quantum physics.
Is it worth mentioning that Kim's basis here isn't actually justified by contemporary science and hasn't been since before his birth? I can appreciate that the philosophy of mind by and large proceeds as if the quantum revolution didn't happen (like, in 1927), but here it really is particularly relevant. 'Which route' an electron is measured to have passed in a standard double-slit experiment with detectors is not physically determined by any known law. Likewise, the function of the ion channels in our physiology (involved in brain function) has to be modeled probabilistically. So Kim isn't entitled to first premise that "every physical event is fully accountable in terms of physical causes". Physics only gives us a selection of possible outcomes. Which outcome does arise out of the physically described possibilities is in no way overdetermined. Physicists haven't found _ANYTHING_ which determines which of the possible outcomes we do in fact register as having occurred. Or does this point count as original (and painfully obvious) research until someone digs up a paper that explicitly states this?

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Jaegwon Kim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071017192900/http://www.ephilosopher.com/page.php?15 to http://www.ephilosopher.com/page.php?15
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071017192900/http://www.ephilosopher.com/page.php?15 to http://www.ephilosopher.com/page.php?15

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)