DOCSLIB.ORG

Posteriority Entails Contingency and Conceivability Entails Possibility; That Is, the Relationship Between, and the Nature Of, Rationality and Modality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Posteriority Entails Contingency and Conceivability Entails Possibility; That Is, the Relationship Between, and the Nature Of, Rationality and Modality Durham E-Theses Conceivability, Apriority and Modality WINSTANLEY, PAUL How to cite: WINSTANLEY, PAUL (2011) Conceivability, Apriority and Modality, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/860/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk Conceivability, Apriority and Modality Paul Winstanley Submitted for the degree of PhD Department of Philosophy University of Durham 2011 Abstract I aim to understand whether apriority entails necessity, aposteriority entails contingency and conceivability entails possibility; that is, the relationship between, and the nature of, rationality and modality. The thesis is split into two parts: one on apriority and modality (chs. 2-4), and another on conceivability, apriority/aposteriority and modality (chs. 5 to 7). In Chapter 1, I discuss ‘two-dimensional modal semantics’, arguing that it is ill-equipped to provide a substantive account of rationality and modality, before setting out the basis of such an understanding. I begin the first part of the thesis (in Chapter 2) by outlining a preliminary account of the a priori: it is, strictly, not defeasible by empirical evidence; it involves a kind of necessity (‘rational necessity’); and it is (at least in its prima facie variant) fallible. In Chapter 3 I discuss the contingent a priori, arguing that genuine apriority entails necessity, before placing apriority qua ‘rational necessity’ (and ‘rational modality’ more widely) with respect to other kinds of modality (in Chapter 4). I conclude Part I of the thesis, by arguing that the a priori is not coextensive with, but is grounded in, metaphysical necessity. Part II of the thesis begins with a discussion of the necessary a posteriori (Chapter 5), where I argue that there are no genuine cases, thus aposteriority entails contingency and conceivability entails possibility. I then deal with Frege’s and Kripke’s puzzles (Chapter 6), which I claim (as with the necessary a posteriori) pose no genuine problem for conceivability- possibility reasoning. Finally (in Chapter 7), I offer a deeper account of rational modality together with a tentative account of metaphysical modality (and essence). I then conclude that genuine apriority qua rational necessity entails metaphysical necessity; similarly, strictly, aposteriority (rational contingency) entails metaphysical contingency and, (in)conceivability (rational (im)possibility) entails metaphysical (im)possibility. Acknowledgements Much of the research for the thesis has been presented at seminars and conferences in the UK and Europe. In particular, Chapter 1 draws on material presented at the 2005 Durham-Bergen seminar in Bergen, Norway (subsequently published in the proceedings, as ‘Conceivabilities and possibilities’), and on a paper presented at the 2005 National Postgraduate Analytic Philosophy Conference in York (subsequently published in Percipi, as ‘Conceivability, Possibility and Two-Dimensional Semantics’). Chapter 3 draws on work presented at the First SIFA Graduate Conference in Padova, 2007 (subsequently published in the proceedings, as ‘‘I exist’: the contingent a priori and indexicality’). I am grateful to the organisers and editors concerned for allowing me to present this material here. I am further grateful to several audience members (notably Timothy Williamson) for forcing me to think more deeply about some of the relevant issues. I am, of course, deeply indebted to my supervisor, Jonathan Lowe. I should also mention Durham’s postgraduate philosophy community. I have had many very helpful discussions with Tuomas Tahko, Donnchadh O’Connaill and Michael Turp. I have also had much, general, philosophical support from my good friend, Tony Booth, who deserves a particular mention. Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Emma, for her continuing love and understanding, especially during the last, rather taxing months of the PhD. Contents Chapter 1: From Metaphysics to Semantics: Two-Dimensionalism, Rationality and Modality 1 Introduction 1 2 From Kripkean to two-dimensional semantics 4 3 The real issues 12 4 Thesis outline 20 PART I: APRIORITY AND MODALITY Chapter 2: The A Priori: Preliminaries 1 Introduction 25 2 A negative account? 28 2.1 Independence 30 2.2 Experience 34 3 A positive account? 39 4 Justifiability, objectivity and subjectivity 43 5 Euclid and defeasibility 47 6 Fallibility 58 Chapter 3: Coincidence, Goldbach and the Contingent A Priori 1 Introduction 62 2 The coincidence thesis and Goldbach’s conjecture 63 3 The contingent a priori 68 3.1 Problems with the metre stick 70 3.2 ‘I exist’: a better example? 80 3.3 Apriority, indexicality and Evansian, ‘superficial’ contingency 83 3.4 Apriority, introspection and causation 92 4 Conclusion 99 Chapter 4: Rational, Epistemic, Logical and Metaphysical Modalities 1 Introduction 103 2 Rational necessity, rational insight and metaphysical modality 105 2.1 The regress problem 112 2.2 Apriority and rational necessity; certainty and objectivity 117 3 Rational, epistemic and logical modalities 121 3.1 Rational and epistemic necessity 122 3.2 Rational necessity and the logical necessities 127 4 Apriority as rational necessity 134 PART II: RATIONALITY AND MODALITY Chapter 5: The Necessary A Posteriori, Conceivability and Possibility 1 Introduction 141 2 A Kripkean argument for the necessary a posteriori 144 3 How many propositions? 155 4 Another argument? 164 5 The necessary a posteriori conceivability and possibility 175 Chapter 6: Frege and Kripke’s Problems, Conceivability and Possibility 1 Introduction 181 2 Frege’s problem and Kripke’s puzzle 183 2.1 Frege’s problem 183 2.2 Kripke’s puzzle 190 3 Conceivability, rational and metaphysical modalities 200 3.1 The problems, conceivability and possibility 201 3.2 (In)conceivability and (im)possibility: Goldbach’s conjecture again 203 Chapter 7: Rationality, Modality and Essence 1 Introduction 215 2 The nature of metaphysical modality 215 2.1 ‘Actual’ and ‘possible’ worlds 216 2.2 Possible worlds, ‘realism’ and essentialism 221 2.3 Problems with possibilism and merits of modalism 224 2.4 The grounding of modality 230 3 Thesis summary 235 4 Issues, objections and replies 243 4.1 Fallibilism, justifiability, circularity and two-dimensionalism 244 4.2 The possibility of modal error 248 Bibliography 257 Chapter 1 From Metaphysics to Semantics: Two-Dimensionalism, Rationality and Modality 1 Introduction Philosophy, at least as traditionally conceived, is a deeply modal and broadly a priori discipline. Philosophers are interested in necessary and possible 1 conclusions, and whether, for example, a priori or conceivability-based reasoning justifies these; whether apriority entails necessity and ‘conceivability’ entails possibility.2 The empirical sciences (again, as trad- itionally understood) are, as the ‘empirical’ suggests, largely a posteriori. Scientists are interested in contingent truths about the natural world and are generally less interested in whether, for example, aposteriority entails contingency. Broadly stated then, a simple, traditional demarcation of philosophy and science would have the latter exemplified by a posteriori investigation of contingent truths (or probabilities), with the former consisting of putatively a priori-necessary and conceivability-possibility forms of reasoning. After the seminal work of Kripke on the ‘contingent a priori’ and ‘necessary 1 I intend metaphysical modality here—but this is a topic of dispute throughout. I begin to clarify this issue towards the end of this section and throughout the remainder of the thesis. 2 There is a lot of shorthand here, which I explain in more detail later. The scare quotes indicate the contentiousness of ‘conceivability’. I offer working understandings of modality shortly, and of apriority and conceivability in §3 below. 2 a posteriori’3 there appeared to be much to challenge such an understanding of philosophy, science, rationality and modality. Specifically, the contingent a priori (if genuine) invalidates any entailment from apriority to necessity. Similarly, the necessary a posteriori (if genuine) undermines (for example) philosophy’s position as the main provider of necessary or essentialist conclusions, since if a posteriori justification can result in necessary conclusions, empirical science (perhaps alone) can establish essentialist results; i.e. scientific essentialism. Moreover, the necessary a posteriori would also appear to further challenge the methodology of traditional philosophy, viz the conceivability-possibility form of reasoning; if p is necessary and a posteriori, ¬p is impossible but, apparently, ‘a priori possible’ or ‘conceivable’— that is, ‘conceivability’ does not entail possibility. In short, whilst having significant ramifications for the status of both philosophy and science, apriority, conceivability (i.e. rationality)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Medieval Western Philosophy: the European Emergence
    Cultural Heritage and Contemporary Change Series I, Culture and Values, Volume 9 History of Western Philosophy by George F. McLean and Patrick J. Aspell Medieval Western Philosophy: The European Emergence By Patrick J. Aspell The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy 1 Copyright © 1999 by The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy Gibbons Hall B-20 620 Michigan Avenue, NE Washington, D.C. 20064 All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Aspell, Patrick, J. Medieval western philosophy: the European emergence / Patrick J. Aspell. p.cm. — (Cultural heritage and contemporary change. Series I. Culture and values ; vol. 9) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Philosophy, Medieval. I. Title. III. Series. B721.A87 1997 97-20069 320.9171’7’090495—dc21 CIP ISBN 1-56518-094-1 (pbk.) 2 Table of Contents Chronology of Events and Persons Significant in and beyond the History of Medieval Europe Preface xiii Part One: The Origins of Medieval Philosophy 1 Chapter I. Augustine: The Lover of Truth 5 Chapter II. Universals According to Boethius, Peter Abelard, and Other Dialecticians 57 Chapter III. Christian Neoplatoists: John Scotus Erigena and Anselm of Canterbury 73 Part Two: The Maturity of Medieval Philosophy Chronology 97 Chapter IV. Bonaventure: Philosopher of the Exemplar 101 Chapter V. Thomas Aquinas: Philosopher of the Existential Act 155 Part Three: Critical Reflection And Reconstruction 237 Chapter VI. John Duns Scotus: Metaphysician of Essence 243 Chapter
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Aquinas: Soul-Body Connection and the Afterlife Hyde Dawn Krista University of Missouri-St
    University of Missouri, St. Louis IRL @ UMSL Theses Graduate Works 4-16-2012 Thomas Aquinas: Soul-Body Connection and the Afterlife Hyde Dawn Krista University of Missouri-St. Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Krista, Hyde Dawn, "Thomas Aquinas: Soul-Body Connection and the Afterlife" (2012). Theses. 261. http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis/261 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Works at IRL @ UMSL. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of IRL @ UMSL. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Thomas Aquinas: Soul-Body Connection and the Afterlife Krista Hyde M.L.A., Washington University in St. Louis, 2010 B.A., Philosophy, Southeast Missouri State University – Cape Girardeau, 2003 A Thesis Submitted to The Graduate School at the University of Missouri – St. Louis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in Philosophy April 2012 Advisory Committee Gualtiero Piccinini, Ph.D. Chair Jon McGinnis, Ph.D. John Brunero, Ph.D. Copyright, Krista Hyde, 2012 Abstract Thomas Aquinas nearly succeeds in addressing the persistent problem of the mind-body relationship by redefining the human being as a body-soul (matter-form) composite. This redefinition makes the interaction problem of substance dualism inapplicable, because there is no soul “in” a body. However, he works around the mind- body problem only by sacrificing an immaterial afterlife, as well as the identity and separability of the soul after death. Additionally, Thomistic psychology has difficulty accounting for the transmission of universals, nor does it seem able to overcome the arguments for causal closure.
    [Show full text]
  • Haecceities, Quiddities, and Structure∗
    compiled on 18 December 2015 at 14:00 Haecceities, quiddities, and structure∗ Wolfgang Schwarz Draft, 18 December 2015 Abstract. Suppose all truths are made true by the distribution of funda- mental properties and relations over fundamental particulars. The world is then completely characterized by stating which fundamental properties and relations are instantiated by which fundamental particulars. But do we have to mention the fundamental particulars by name? Arguably not. Arguably, all truths – or at least all truths we can ever know – are made true by the pattern in which fundamental properties and relations are instantiated by fundamental particulars, irrespective of the identity (“haecceity”) of those particulars. Parallel arguments suggest that the identity (“quiddity”) of fundamental properties and relations can be omitted. It would follow that all truths (or all knowable truths) are made true by the abstract structure of the world, the pattern in which fundamental properties and relations are instantiated by fundamental particulars, irrespective of the identity of the properties, relations, and particulars. I argue that this is almost correct: while not all truths are made true by the abstract structure of the world, the remaining truths are (in a certain sense) not made true by the world at all. 1 Introduction Most truths can be explained by other, more fundamental truths. That salt dissolves in water, for example, can be explained by the chemical composition of salt and water together with the general laws of physics. Explanations of this kind plausibly come to an end. At some point we reach a bottom level of fundamental facts that are not explainable in terms of anything more basic.
    [Show full text]
  • Putnam's Theory of Natural Kinds and Their Names Is Not The
    PUTNAM’S THEORY OF NATURAL KINDS AND THEIR NAMES IS NOT THE SAME AS KRIPKE’S IAN HACKING Collège de France Abstract Philosophers have been referring to the “Kripke–Putnam” theory of natural- kind terms for over 30 years. Although there is one common starting point, the two philosophers began with different motivations and presuppositions, and developed in different ways. Putnam’s publications on the topic evolved over the decades, certainly clarifying and probably modifying his analysis, while Kripke published nothing after 1980. The result is two very different theories about natural kinds and their names. Both accept that the meaning of a natural- kind term is not given by a description or defining properties, but is specified by its referents. From then on, Putnam rejected even the label, causal theory of reference, preferring to say historical, or collective. He called his own approach indexical. His account of substance identity stops short a number of objections that were later raised, such as what is called the qua problem. He came to reject the thought that water is necessarily H2O, and to denounce the idea of metaphysical necessity that goes beyond physical necessity. Essences never had a role in his analysis; there is no sense in which he was an essentialist. He thought of hidden structures as the usual determinant of natural kinds, but always insisted that what counts as a natural kind is relative to interests. “Natural kind” itself is itself an importantly theoretical concept, he argued. The paper also notes that Putnam says a great deal about what natural kinds are, while Kripke did not.
    [Show full text]
  • The Univocity of Substance and the Formal Distinction of Attributes: the Role of Duns Scotus in Deleuze's Reading of Spinoza Nathan Widder
    parrhesia 33 · 2020 · 150-176 the univocity of substance and the formal distinction of attributes: the role of duns scotus in deleuze's reading of spinoza nathan widder This paper examines the role played by medieval theologian John Duns Scotus in Gilles Deleuze’s reading of Spinoza’s philosophy of expressive substance; more generally, it elaborates a crucial moment in the development of Deleuze’s philosophy of sense and difference. Deleuze contends that Spinoza adapts and extends Duns Scotus’s two most influential theses, the univocity of being and formal distinction, despite neither appearing explicitly in Spinoza’s writings. “It takes nothing away from Spinoza’s originality,” Deleuze declares, “to place him in a perspective that may already be found in Duns Scotus” (Deleuze, 1992, 49).1 Nevertheless, the historiographic evidence is clearly lacking, leaving Deleuze to admit that “it is hardly likely that” Spinoza had even read Duns Scotus (359n28). Indeed, the only support he musters for his speculation is Spinoza’s obvious in- terests in scholastic metaphysical and logical treatises, the “probable influence” of the Scotist-informed Franciscan priest Juan de Prado on his thought, and the fact that the problems Duns Scotus addresses need not be confined to Christian thought (359–360n28). The paucity of evidence supporting this “use and abuse” of history, however, does not necessarily defeat the thesis. Like other lineages Deleuze proposes, the one he traces from Duns Scotus to Spinoza, and subsequently to Nietzsche, turns not on establishing intentional references by one thinker to his predecessor, but instead on showing how the borrowings and adaptations asserted to create the connec- tion make sense of the way the second philosopher surmounts blockages he faces while responding to issues left unaddressed by the first.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquinas' Principle of Individuation
    Aquinas' Principle of Individuation Patrick W. Hughes Denison University Saint Thomas Aquinas, the Thirteenth Century Catholic theologian and philosopher was one of the first Medieval philosophers to attempt to reconcile the newly re-introduced Aristotelian system with the Catholic religious thought ofthe day. Aquinas' numerous commentaries on Aristotle and his adoption of the Aristotelian thought form the basis for the whole of Aquinian metaphysics (as well as the basic Aristotileanism which pervades Aquinas' whole systematic philosophy), In this paper I will deal with a specific yet fundamental principle ofAquinianmetaphysics-the principle of individuation. On first reading of the Aquinian texts, the principle of individuation appears to be stated succinctly, yet further investigation into the concept of individuation reveals problems and ambiguities. As it is necessary for an understanding of the problem of individuation in the Aquinian system, I will start off with the basic ontology ofAquinas and then will proceed with one interpretation of the ambiguities which exist in the texts regarding the principle of individuation. I will then give a counter interpretation that Aquinas might level against my interpretation and the problems ofmy interpretation; finally, I will analyze any problems that arise from the Aquinian response. 1. Primary Substance in Aristotle and Aquinas The difficulty in dealing with systematic philosophy is that it is difficult to know where to begin, since each concept is built upon previous concepts and all of the concepts are fundamentally interrelated. Neverthe­ less, I shall start by explicating Aquinas' fundamental ontology. Aquinas, following Aristotle, points out that the world is made up of individual things-or what Aquinas calls "primary substances", Socrates, Rover, and the pine tree in my yard are all existing individual primary substances in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Christology and the 'Scotist Rupture'
    Theological Research ■ volume 1 (2013) ■ p. 31–63 Aaron Riches Instituto de Filosofía Edith Stein Instituto de Teología Lumen Gentium, Granada, Spain Christology and the ‘Scotist Rupture’ Abstract This essay engages the debate concerning the so-called ‘Scotist rupture’ from the point of view of Christology. The essay investigates John Duns Scotus’s de- velopment of Christological doctrine against the strong Cyrilline tendencies of Thomas Aquinas. In particular the essay explores how Scotus’s innovative doctrine of the ‘haecceity’ of Christ’s human nature entailed a self-sufficing conception of the ‘person’, having to do less with the mystery of rationality and ‘communion’, and more to do with a quasi-voluntaristic ‘power’ over oneself. In this light, Scotus’s Christological development is read as suggestively con- tributing to make possible a proto-liberal condition in which ‘agency’ (agere) and ‘right’ (ius) are construed as determinative of what it means to be and act as a person. Keywords John Duns Scotus, ‘Scotist rupture’, Thomas Aquinas, homo assumptus Christology 32 Aaron Riches Introduction In A Secular Age, Charles Taylor links the movement towards the self- sufficing ‘exclusive humanism’ characteristic of modern secularism with a reallocation of popular piety in the thirteenth century.1 Dur- ing that period a shift occurred in which devotional practices became less focused on the cosmological glory of Christ Pantocrator and more focused on the particular humanity of the lowly Jesus. Taylor suggests that this new devotional attention to the particular human Christ was facilitated by the recently founded mendicant orders, especially the Franciscans and Dominicans, both of whom saw the meekness of God Incarnate reflected in the individual poor among whom the friars lived and ministered.
    [Show full text]
  • A Defense of the Identity Theory by ©2013 Nicholas K. Simmons Submitted To
    Why Sensations Must be Neurological Properties: A Defense of the Identity Theory by ©2013 Nicholas K. Simmons Submitted to the graduate degree program in Philosophy and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Chairperson, John Bricke John Symons Thomas Tuozzo Ben Eggleston Michael Vitevitch Date Defended: April 16, 2013 The Dissertation Committee for Nicholas K. Simmons certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Why Sensations Must be Neurological Properties: A Defense of the Identity Theory Chairperson, John Bricke Date Approved: April 16, 2013 ii ABSTRACT In this dissertation, I defend the thesis that qualitative mental states known as qualia (e.g., tastes, feelings, pains) are identical to physical properties. In Chapter 1, I argue that qualia have a functional role in the world, and that is to facilitate non-automatic mental processes. In Chapter 2, I demonstrate how non-reductive accounts of the mind fail. In Chapter 3, I demonstrate how my reductive account fares better than similar accounts with respect to common and contemporary objections. In Chapter 4, I address arguments against any view like mine which seeks to understand qualia in a physicalistic framework. iii CONTENTS Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 A BRIEF CHART OF THE TERRAIN .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Peirce on the Medievals: Realism, Power and Form Peirce Acerca Dos Medievais: Realismo, Poder E Forma
    Peirce on the Medievals: Realism, Power and Form Peirce acerca dos Medievais: Realismo, Poder e Forma John Boler University of Washington [email protected] Abstract: In the first section, I discuss Peirce’s ambivalence attitude towards medieval thinkers – some high praise, some harsh criticism. In the second, I consider three criticisms Max Fisch mde of my book Charles Peirce and Scholastic Realism. My book had presented Peirce’s realism as if it were a single position from first to last. And I want to adjust that in the light of Fisch’s points. I now want to distinguish his scholastic realism from his on- going development of realism. To this end, I offer a more restricted and precise meaning to “scholastic realism” – roughly an anti-platonism in which the common nature is found as an element in things. That meaning does, I think, remain constant for Peirce; though I agree with Fisch that this is only a part of his developing realism. In the third section, I bring out the connection between the scholastic notion of potentiality and Peirce’s “would- be’s.” Interestingly enough (to me), this is not an influence that Peirce himself acknowledges. I also point out there that Peirce is rather dismissive of the scholastic notion of form, which he thinks is a perversion of Aristotle’s more useful (if vague) position. Keywords: Realism. Potentiality. Form. Matter. Resumo: Na primeira seção, discuto a atitude ambivalente de Peirce para com os pensadores medievais – algumas avaliações elogiosas, algumas críticas duras. Na segunda parte, considero três críticas feitas por Max Fisch ao meu livro Charles Peirce and Scholastic Realism.
    [Show full text]
  • “But What, Then, Am I
    --Religious Studies 43/3 (2007): 333-348. Published by Cambridge University Press Persons and the metaphysics of resurrection Lynne Rudder Baker Department of Philosophy Bartlett Hall 352 University of Massachusetts Amherst Amherst, MA 01003 USA Theories of the human person differ greatly in their ability to underwrite a metaphysics of resurrection. This paper compares and contrasts a number of such views in light of the Christian doctrine of resurrection. In a Christian framework, resurrection requires that the same person who exists on earth also exists in an afterlife, that a postmortem person be embodied, and that the existence of a postmortem person is brought about by a miracle. According to my view of persons (the Constitution View), a human person is constituted by—but not identical to—a human organism. A person has a first-person perspective essentially, and an organism has interrelated biological functions essentially. I shall argue for the superiority the Constitution View as a metaphysical basis for resurrection. ‘But what, then, am I?’ Descartes famously asked. Although many of us today reject Descartes’s equally famous answer--I am an immaterial mind--Descartes was right, I believe, to identify himself with a thinking thing, a thing who ‘doubts, understands, affirms, 2 denies, wills, refuses, and which also imagines and senses’.1 But neither an immaterial mind nor a material brain is the thing that thinks. The thing that thinks is the person. Just as your legs and feet are the limbs by means of which you walk, you the person—not your legs and feet—are the walker; so too the brain is the organ by means of which you think, but you the person—not your brain—are the thinker.
    [Show full text]
  • Barnes, Bryant, Ma August 2019
    BARNES, BRYANT, M.A. AUGUST 2019 PHILOSOPHY PROPERTY INDIVIDUATION (66 pp.) Thesis Advisor: Deborah C. Smith This thesis will address the question of what individuates a property. In the current literature, the question is predominately answered in three ways. Quidditism takes properties to be categorical and individuated by their quiddities, that is, by the intrinsic nature of the property. Structuralism takes properties to be individuated by the structural roles (e.g., causal or nomological) that they play. Causal structuralism, for example, maintains that a property is individuated by the causal relationships it enters. I will survey the strengths and weaknesses of these positions and conclude by arguing for John Heil’s mixed view, which takes properties to be both dispositional and categorical. However, because Heil’s mixed view is about the nature of properties and not individuation, I will have to construct individuation conditions appropriate for his theory regarding the nature of properties. My concluding chapter will consist of articulating and defending my individuation conditions for Heil’s mixed view. PROPERTY INDIVIDUATION A thesis submitted To Kent State University in partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Bryant Barnes August 2019 © Copyright All rights reserved Except for previously published materials Thesis written by Bryant Barnes B.A., King University, 2016 M.A. Kent State University, 2019 Approved by _______________________________, Advisor Deborah C. Smith _______________________________,
    [Show full text]
  • American Catholic Philosophical Association
    American Catholic Philosophical Association Executive Council Eighty-Third Annual Meeting Mary Beth Ingham Therese-Anne Druart Edward Houser Steven Jensen Reason in Context Patrick Brennan Mark Gossiaux Judith Green Patrick Murray Loyola University of New Orleans Brian Treanor Catherine A.J. Deavel Hotel Monteleone Colleen McCluskey New Orleans, LA Douglas B. Rasmussen James B. South November 13 - November 15, 2009 Richard C. Taylor Sarah Byers Matthew Cuddeback Christopher Cullen Tobias Hoffmann Michael Tkacz William Desmond Officers of the Association President……..………Mary Beth Ingham Vice-President……Therese-Anne Druart Secretary……….….…….Edward Houser Program Committee Treasurer………...………….Steve Jensen Bonnie Kent Christopher Kaczor John Hittinger ST. AUGUSTINE’S PRESS 25% discount on all our titles Dear Friends: I must miss this year’s ACPA for family reasons, but though I’ll be gone, I don’t like the idea of being forgot- ten. So whatever good I could have done being at the meeting I’ll do being absent by offering all ACPA mem- bers a 25% discount on everything St. Augustine’s has pub- lished or is in the process of publishing (I suppose this means that though I’ll be gone, I won’t be missed). Simply go to our website, www.staugustine.net, and purchase anything you’d like, including forthcoming titles. At checkout be sure to put in “ACPA” (without the quote marks) in the promo code box. Then you will automatical- ly receive a 25% discount. This offer is good from November 12, 2009, through December 15, 2009, only. Best regards, Bruce Fingerhut Some New & Forthcoming Titles from St.
    [Show full text]