Abstract
According to the modal view, essence admits of reductive analysis in exclusively modal terms. Fine (1994) argues that modal view delivers an inadequate analysis of essence. This paper defends the modal view from Fine's challenge. This defense proceeds by examining the disagreement between Finean primitivists and Quinean eliminativists about essence. In order to model this disagreement, a distinction between essence and a separable concept, nature, is required. This distinction is then used to show that Fine's challenge is misdirected and therefore unsuccessful.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference24 articles.
1. How Things Might Have Been
2. A Counterfactual Account of Essence;Brogaard;The Reasoner,2007
3. Ideological Parsimony;Cowling;Synthese,forthcoming
4. Essentialism and Quantified Modal Logic
Cited by
49 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献