I'm currently reading Kim's The Mind-Body Problem after Fifty Years which tries to summarise how the MB problem has evolved and been approached the past few decades.
One of the very important terms that are used is supervenience. The mental supervenes on the physical, is a phrase that is often uttered. In other words, a mental state is dependent on a physical state. The issue I'm having is that I do not see how this works in a nonreductionist view. On page 8, Kim says
Moreover, and this was of crucial importance to the nonreductive physicalist, supervenience prima facie did not seem to commit us to reductionism: after all, many moral theorists [...] believed in the supervenience of the moral on the nonmoral, but rejected the reducibility of the former to the latter.
First of all, I don't know how I should picture this reference to moral. (An example would be useful.) How does moral supervene on the nonmoral. How does moral need the nonmoral? Second, how does this lead to an understanding of nonreductionist supervenience?
How can you say that something is completely dependent on a "lower-class" element that completely determines its properties, without reducing it to that element?
Note that I read this explanation, but that it didn't really clarify things for me. Is there a concrete example in which one could be said to follow a nonreductionist supervenience philosophy?