David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In Tuomas E. Tahko (ed.), Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics. Cambridge University Press 187--206 (2012)
It is common to think of essence along modal lines: the essential truths, on this approach, are a subset of the necessary truths. But Aristotle conceives of the necessary truths as being distinct and derivative from the essential truths. Such a non-modal conception of essence also constitutes a central component of the neo-Aristotelian approach to metaphysics defended over the last several decades by Kit Fine. Both Aristotle and Fine rely on a distinction between what belongs to the essence proper of an object and what merely follows from the essence proper of an object. In order for this type of approach to essence and modality to be successful, we must be able to identify an appropriate consequence relation which in fact generates the result that the necessary truths about objects follow from the essential truths. I discuss some proposals put forward by Fine and then turn to Aristotle’s account: Aristotle’s central idea, to trace the explanatory power of definitions (statements of the essence) to the causal power of essences has the potential to open the door to a philosophically satisfying response to the question of why certain things are relevant, while others are irrelevant, to the nature or essence of entities. If at all possible, it would be desirable for example to have something further to say by way of explanation to such questions as ‘Why is the number 2 completely irrelevant to the nature of camels?’.
|Keywords||essence necessity modality Aristotle ontological dependence Kit Fine definition causation|
|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
Shamik Dasgupta (2014). Metaphysical Rationalism. Noûs 49 (2):n/a-n/a.
Similar books and articles
Fabrice Correia (2012). On the Reduction of Necessity to Essence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 84 (3):639-653.
Anand Jayprakash Vaidya (2010). Understanding and Essence. Philosophia 38 (4):811-833.
David Charles (2002). Aristotle on Meaning and Essence. Oxford University Press.
Kit Fine (1994). Essence and Modality. Philosophical Perspectives 8:1-16.
Ross P. Cameron (2010). The Grounds of Necessity. Philosophy Compass 5 (4):348-358.
Tuomas E. Tahko (2013). Metaphysics as the First Philosophy. In Edward Feser (ed.), Aristotle on Method and Metaphysics. Palgrave Macmillan
Alvin Plantinga (1992). The Nature of Necessity. Clarendon Press.
Richard Sorabji (1980/2006). Necessity, Cause, and Blame: Perspectives on Aristotle's Theory. University of Chicago Press.
Christopher Byrne (2002). Aristotle on Physical Necessity and the Limits of Teleological Explanation. Apeiron 35 (01):19-46.
Nick Zangwill (2005). Moore, Morality, Supervenience, Essence, Epistemology. American Philosophical Quarterly 42 (2):125 - 130.
S. Marc Cohen (1978). Individual and Essence in Aristotle's Metaphysics. Paideia (Special Aristotle Edition):75-85.
Dezhi Duan (2007). Aquinas' Transcendences to Aristotle in the Doctrine of Essence. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 2 (4):572-582.
Added to index2012-10-05
Total downloads109 ( #27,352 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)22 ( #39,230 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?