David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Southern Journal of Philosophy 48 (3):246-271 (2010)
In this essay, I argue that a proper understanding of the historicity of love requires an appreciation of the irreplaceability of the beloved. I do this through a consideration of ideas that were first put forward by Robert Kraut in “Love De Re” (1986). I also evaluate Amelie Rorty's criticisms of Kraut's thesis in “The Historicity of Psychological Attitudes: Love is Not Love Which Alters Not When It Alteration Finds” (1986). I argue that Rorty fundamentally misunderstands Kraut's Kripkean analogy, and I go on to criticize her claim that concern over the proper object of love should be best understood as a concern over constancy. This leads me to an elaboration of the distinct senses in which love can be seen as historical. I end with a further defense of the irreplaceability of the beloved and a discussion of the relevance of recent debates over the importance of personal identity for an adequate account of the historical dimension of love
|Keywords||love history causal theory personal identity irreplaceability|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Bernard Arthur Owen Williams (1985). Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. Harvard University Press.
Thomas Nagel (1986). The View From Nowhere. Oxford University Press.
Robert Nozick (1974). Anarchy, State and Utopia. Basic Books.
Saul A. Kripke (1980/1998). Naming and Necessity. Harvard University Press.
Derek Parfit (1984). Reasons and Persons. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Hichem Naar (2015). Subject‐Relative Reasons for Love. Ratio 28 (4).
Timothy Chappell (2011). On the Very Idea of Criteria for Personhood. Southern Journal of Philosophy 49 (1):1-27.
Aaron Smuts (2014). Normative Reasons for Love, Part II. Philosophy Compass 9 (8):518-526.
Christopher Grau & Cynthia Pury (2014). Attitudes Towards Reference and Replaceability. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 5 (2):155-168.
Tony Milligan (2013). The Duplication of Love's Reasons. Philosophical Explorations 16 (3):315 - 323.
Similar books and articles
Lubomir Lamy (2011). Love or the Black Sun of Personal Relationships. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 41 (3):247-259.
Troy A. Jollimore (2011). Love's Vision. Princeton University Press.
Alan Soble (2000). The Coherence of Love. Philosophy and Theology 12 (2):293-315.
Amelie Oksenberg Rorty (1987). The Historicity of Psychological Attitudes: Love Is Not Love Which Alters Not When It Alteration Finds. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 10 (1):399-412.
Simon May (2011). Love: A Secret History. Yale University Press.
Pierre Rousselot (2001). The Problem of Love in the Middle Ages: A Historical Contribution. Marquette University Press.
Simon May (2011). Love: A History. Yale University Press.
Bennett W. Helm, Love. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Added to index2010-05-05
Total downloads157 ( #16,757 of 1,780,182 )
Recent downloads (6 months)19 ( #40,362 of 1,780,182 )
How can I increase my downloads?