David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
B opens his discussion of the problem of universals, in his second commentary on Porphyry’s Isagoge, with a destructive dilemma: genera and species either exist or are concepts; but they can neither exist nor be soundly conceived; therefore the enquiry into them should be abandoned (In Isag. maior . ). Boethius’ strategy to get around this dilemma is well known. He follows the lead of Alexander of Aphrodisias, distinguishing several ways in which genera and species can be conceived, and he argues that at least one way involves no falsity. Hence it is possible to conceive genera and species soundly, and Porphyry’s enquiry into them is therefore not futile after all (. ). Boethius thus resolves the second horn of his opening dilemma. Yet he allows the ﬁrst horn of the dilemma, the claim that genera and species cannot exist, to stand. The implication is that he takes his arguments for this claim to be sound. If so, this would be a philosophically exciting and signiﬁcant result, well worth exploring in its own right. Yet there is no consensus, either medieval or modern, on precisely what Boethius’ arguments are, or even how many arguments he oﬀers, much less on their soundness. One reason for the lack..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Riin Sirkel (2011). Alexander of Aphrodisias's Account of Universals and its Problems. Journal of the History of Philosophy 49 (3):297-314.
Paul Vincent Spade, Boethius Against Universals: The Arguments in the Second Commentary on Porphyry.
Joel M. Potter (2009). The Status of Status: Boethian Realism in Abelard. Carmina Philosophiae 18:127-135.
Marc Ereshefsky (2010). Darwin's Solution to the Species Problem. Synthese 175 (3):405 - 425.
Ettore Casari (2000). On Husserl's Theory of Wholes and Parts. History and Philosophy of Logic 21 (1):1-43.
Rick O'Neil (1997). Intrinsic Value, Moral Standing, and Species. Environmental Ethics 19 (1):45-52.
Mark Ridley (1989). The Cladistic Solution to the Species Problem. Biology and Philosophy 4 (1):1-16.
Jason Rogers & Jonathan Matheson (2011). Bergmann's Dilemma: Exit Strategies for Internalists. Philosophical Studies 152 (1):55 - 80.
C. Ricotta & G. C. Avena (2003). An Information-Theoretical Measure of Taxonomic Diversity. Acta Biotheoretica 51 (1):35-41.
Ingo Brigandt (2003). Species Pluralism Does Not Imply Species Eliminativism. Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1305–1316.
John Magee (2010). On the Composition and Sources of Boethius Second Peri Hermeneias Commentary. Vivarium 48 (1-2):7-54.
Bradley E. Wilson (1991). Are Species Sets? Biology and Philosophy 6 (4):413-431.
R. W. Sharples (2005). Alexander of Aphrodisias on Universals: Two Problematic Texts. Phronesis 50 (1):43 - 55.
Added to index2011-06-20
Total downloads21 ( #221,975 of 1,932,583 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #456,397 of 1,932,583 )
How can I increase my downloads?