Does matter have non-dispositional intrinsic qualities? Sydney Shoеmaker against quidditism

The article discusses the problem of the existence of the fundamental non-dispositional intrinsic qualities of matter (quiddities) and arguments for two opposite views, quidditism and dispositionalism (causal structuralism). In support of quidditism, arguments by Howard Robinson, John Foster and Ph...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Dmytro Sepetyi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Academy of Cognitive and Natural Sciences 2023-12-01
Series:Актуальні проблеми духовності
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journal.kdpu.edu.ua/apd/article/view/7680
_version_ 1797351132530475008
author Dmytro Sepetyi
author_facet Dmytro Sepetyi
author_sort Dmytro Sepetyi
collection DOAJ
description The article discusses the problem of the existence of the fundamental non-dispositional intrinsic qualities of matter (quiddities) and arguments for two opposite views, quidditism and dispositionalism (causal structuralism). In support of quidditism, arguments by Howard Robinson, John Foster and Philip Goff are deployed. These arguments highlight the incoherence or unintelligibility of the doctrine that the whole reality is just a network of causal relations without any qualitative filler in the nodes of the network. Sydney Shoemaker’s influential argument for dispositionalism, in the article “Causality and Properties”, is analysed and responded. The case is made that Shoemaker’s objections against the existence of fundamental properties whose identity “consists of something logically independent of their causal potentialities” can be neutralised on the assumption that our world is operated by ontologically fundamental laws of nature in virtue of which quiddities have constant causal potentialities. Quidditism with this assumption makes it possible to know all the same properties of matter as dispositionalism, viz., dispositional properties and spatiotemporal relations. So, pace Shoemaker, it has no “disastrous epistemological consequences”. Although such quidditism expands (as compared with dispositionalism) ontology by attributing matter not only with knowable dispositional properties (causal structures) but also with quiddities, which are in a sense unknowable, this ontological exuberance is justified by the need to avoid the vicious regress of powers entailed by dispositionalism.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T12:56:00Z
format Article
id doaj.art-26ee0c95f6b3456b854872ebb792e3eb
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2076-7382
2522-4786
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T12:56:00Z
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher Academy of Cognitive and Natural Sciences
record_format Article
series Актуальні проблеми духовності
spelling doaj.art-26ee0c95f6b3456b854872ebb792e3eb2024-01-19T16:59:56ZengAcademy of Cognitive and Natural SciencesАктуальні проблеми духовності2076-73822522-47862023-12-012410.31812/apm.7680Does matter have non-dispositional intrinsic qualities? Sydney Shoеmaker against quidditismDmytro Sepetyi0Zaporizhzhia State Medical University,Zaporizhia State Medical University The article discusses the problem of the existence of the fundamental non-dispositional intrinsic qualities of matter (quiddities) and arguments for two opposite views, quidditism and dispositionalism (causal structuralism). In support of quidditism, arguments by Howard Robinson, John Foster and Philip Goff are deployed. These arguments highlight the incoherence or unintelligibility of the doctrine that the whole reality is just a network of causal relations without any qualitative filler in the nodes of the network. Sydney Shoemaker’s influential argument for dispositionalism, in the article “Causality and Properties”, is analysed and responded. The case is made that Shoemaker’s objections against the existence of fundamental properties whose identity “consists of something logically independent of their causal potentialities” can be neutralised on the assumption that our world is operated by ontologically fundamental laws of nature in virtue of which quiddities have constant causal potentialities. Quidditism with this assumption makes it possible to know all the same properties of matter as dispositionalism, viz., dispositional properties and spatiotemporal relations. So, pace Shoemaker, it has no “disastrous epistemological consequences”. Although such quidditism expands (as compared with dispositionalism) ontology by attributing matter not only with knowable dispositional properties (causal structures) but also with quiddities, which are in a sense unknowable, this ontological exuberance is justified by the need to avoid the vicious regress of powers entailed by dispositionalism. https://journal.kdpu.edu.ua/apd/article/view/7680matterintrinsic qualityquidditydispositionpowercausality
spellingShingle Dmytro Sepetyi
Does matter have non-dispositional intrinsic qualities? Sydney Shoеmaker against quidditism
Актуальні проблеми духовності
matter
intrinsic quality
quiddity
disposition
power
causality
title Does matter have non-dispositional intrinsic qualities? Sydney Shoеmaker against quidditism
title_full Does matter have non-dispositional intrinsic qualities? Sydney Shoеmaker against quidditism
title_fullStr Does matter have non-dispositional intrinsic qualities? Sydney Shoеmaker against quidditism
title_full_unstemmed Does matter have non-dispositional intrinsic qualities? Sydney Shoеmaker against quidditism
title_short Does matter have non-dispositional intrinsic qualities? Sydney Shoеmaker against quidditism
title_sort does matter have non dispositional intrinsic qualities sydney shoеmaker against quidditism
topic matter
intrinsic quality
quiddity
disposition
power
causality
url https://journal.kdpu.edu.ua/apd/article/view/7680
work_keys_str_mv AT dmytrosepetyi doesmatterhavenondispositionalintrinsicqualitiessydneyshoemakeragainstquidditism