David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Locke Studies 10:61-84 (2010)
I defend an interpretation of Locke’s remarks on substratum according to which substrata not only have sensible qualities but are just familiar things and stuffs: horses, stones, gold, wax, and snow. The supporting relation that holds between substrata and the qualities that they support is simply the familiar relation of having, or instantiating, which holds between a particular substance and its qualities. I address the obvious objection to the interpretation -- namely, that it cannot be reconciled with Locke’s claim that the idea substratum is an obscure, confused idea of we know not what -- and I identify numerous textual parallels between Locke's discussions of substrata and particular substances which strongly support the deflationary interpretation.
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Robert A. Wilson (2002). Locke's Primary Qualities. Journal of the History of Philosophy 40 (2):201-228.
Michael Jacovides (2007). Locke on the Propria of Body. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 15 (3):485 – 511.
Lex Newman (2000). Locke on the Idea of Substratum. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 81 (3):291–324.
I. C. Tipton (ed.) (1977). Locke on Human Understanding: Selected Essays. Oxford University Press.
Theodore Sider (2006). Bare Particulars. Philosophical Perspectives 20 (1):387–397.
Robert A. Wilson (forthcoming). Primary and Secondary Qualities. In Matthew Stuart (ed.), Blackwell Companion to Locke. Blackwell.
Gábor Forrai (2010). Locke on Substance in General. Locke Studies 10:27-59.
Added to index2009-08-22
Total downloads121 ( #6,154 of 1,088,810 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #13,559 of 1,088,810 )
How can I increase my downloads?