ABSTRACT
This chapter intends to a discussion of supervenience as a relation of dependency or determination. The author claims, that there are two separable concepts of supervenience, one stronger than the other, and that often what is offered in a philosophical discussion is the weaker of the two whereas what is needed is the stronger one. He also argues that the stronger relation is equivalent to “global supervenience,” an alternative conception favored by some writers. The idea of supervenience seems to have originated in moral philosophy. In most cases of interest supervenience seems in fact asymmetric; for example, although many have claimed the supervenience of valuational on nonvaluational properties, it is apparent that the converse does not hold. Similarly, although psychophysical supervenience is an arguable view, it would be manifestly implausible to hold that the physical supervenes on the psychological.
