I would have considered much of what I think about Davidson’s “Mental Events” (1970) too obvious to say to anyone who had read the article, except that, a few months ago, I learned a couple of things...

1. It has not been widely noted that anomalous monism depends on a diagonal argument.

2. Everyone thinks that anomalous monism has been summarily refuted (on its own, or under the general heading of “non-reductive physicalism”).

I suspect these facts are related.