Abstract
AbstractIs everything about reality either qualitative or somehow determined by the qualitative character of reality itself? Metaphysical anti-Haecceitism is often taken to be the claim that this is the case, and to entail that reality is fundamentally qualitative. In this paper, I (1) argue against the idea that metaphysical anti-Haecceitism should be characterized in such terms, and (2) defend a novel way to phrase such a view. This will be done by taking the main arguments for anti-Haecceitism as a guide and by singling out the proper commitments of a view that satisfies the desideratum set forth by such arguments. The phrasing I shall offer will help tell the issue of anti-Haecceitism apart from some concerns about fundamentality that, I will contend, are orthogonal to it—among them, the question whether there is fundamentality at all.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference52 articles.
1. Adams, R. M. (1979). Primitive thisness and primitive identity. The Journal of Philosophy, 76(1), 5–26.
2. Adams, R. M. (1981). Actualism and thisness. Synthese, 49(1), 3–41.
3. Ariew, R. (ed.) (2000). Leibniz and Clarke: Correspondence. Hackett Publishing.
4. Audi, P. (2012). Grounding: Toward a theory of the in-virtue-of relation. The Journal of Philosophy, 109(12), 685–711.
5. Babic, J., & Cocco, L. (2020). A note on Dasgupta’s generalism. Philosophical Studies, 177(8), 2153–2162.