Substance substantiated
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
It seems about as likely as the possibility of a blind scientist imagining her way to a positive conception of phenomenal red that we might reach a conception of the non-phenomenal categorical nature of matter through theoretical imagination.
“Whilst I don't have an argument to conclusively rule this out, it seems to me about as likely as the possibility of a blind scientist imagining her way to a positive conception of phenomenal red.”
From Cosmopsychism, Micropsychism and the Grounding Relation (2019) · cites this paper as [21]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cosmopsychism, Micropsychism and the Grounding Relation
Goff, P. (2019) · The Routledge Handbook of Panpsychism · doi:10.4324/9781315717708-13 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
- Authors
- Martin, C. B.
- Affiliations
- University of Calgary (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Martin, C.B.
- Venue
- Australasian Journal of Philosophy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1980-03
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-10
- ISSN
- 0004-8402 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-6828
- OpenAlex
- W4253612904
- Cited by
- 182
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Australasian Journal of Philosophy (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
