In defence of modal essentialism
<p>Kit Fine's arguments in Essence and Modality are widely accepted as being a decisive blow against modal essentialism. A selection of replies exist that have done little to counter the general view that modally construed essence is out of touch with what we really mean when we make esse...
| Egile nagusia: | |
|---|---|
| Formatua: | Journal article |
| Argitaratua: |
Taylor and Francis
2017
|
| _version_ | 1826305749272231936 |
|---|---|
| author | Livingstone-Banks, J |
| author_facet | Livingstone-Banks, J |
| author_sort | Livingstone-Banks, J |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <p>Kit Fine's arguments in Essence and Modality are widely accepted as being a decisive blow against modal essentialism. A selection of replies exist that have done little to counter the general view that modally construed essence is out of touch with what we really mean when we make essentialist claims. I argue that Fine’s arguments fail to strike a decisive blow, and I suggest a new interpretation of the debate that shows why Fine’s arguments fall short of achieving their goal.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T06:37:33Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:f82ac68c-7d6f-4e68-a46b-e4212bc3ef49 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T06:37:33Z |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publisher | Taylor and Francis |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:f82ac68c-7d6f-4e68-a46b-e4212bc3ef492022-03-27T12:48:18ZIn defence of modal essentialismJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:f82ac68c-7d6f-4e68-a46b-e4212bc3ef49Symplectic Elements at OxfordTaylor and Francis2017Livingstone-Banks, J<p>Kit Fine's arguments in Essence and Modality are widely accepted as being a decisive blow against modal essentialism. A selection of replies exist that have done little to counter the general view that modally construed essence is out of touch with what we really mean when we make essentialist claims. I argue that Fine’s arguments fail to strike a decisive blow, and I suggest a new interpretation of the debate that shows why Fine’s arguments fall short of achieving their goal.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Livingstone-Banks, J In defence of modal essentialism |
| title | In defence of modal essentialism |
| title_full | In defence of modal essentialism |
| title_fullStr | In defence of modal essentialism |
| title_full_unstemmed | In defence of modal essentialism |
| title_short | In defence of modal essentialism |
| title_sort | in defence of modal essentialism |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT livingstonebanksj indefenceofmodalessentialism |