KRIPKEAN ESSENTIALIST ARGUMENT AND ITS GENERALIZATION

• Authors: Lee Jaheo
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The author examines the argument by H. Beebee and N. Sabbarton-Leary that Brian Ellis’s scientific essentialism is based on the “abuse” of the necessary a posteriori. He will first briefly survey various attempts to resist what he will call the “Kripkean essentialist argument” to locate Beebee’s and Sabbarton-Leary’s position properly. After that the author will argue that Beebee’s and Sabbarton-Leary’s argument is not successful; in particular, he will argue that under the most natural interpretation of their position it is not internally coherent, and that their argument is based on a superficial understanding of Kripkean necessity a posteriori.

Keywords

EN

KRIPKEAN ESSENTIALIST ARGUMENT; NATURAL KIND; NECESSITY A POSTERIORI; BEEBEE H.; SABBARTON-LEARY

• Publisher: Institute of Philosophy of the Slovak Academy of Sciences and Institute of Philosophy of Academy of Sciences of Czech Republic
• Journal: Organon F. medzinárodný časopis pre analytickú filozofiu
• Year: 2018
• Volume: 25
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 142 - 154

Contributors

author

Lee Jaheo

• Department of Philosophy, Chung-Ang University 84 Heukseokro, Donjak-gu 156-756 Seoul, Korea