David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 138 (1):125-48 (2004)
Kripke and Putnam have convinced most philosophers that we cannot do metaphysics of nature by analysing the senses of natural kind terms -- simply because natural kind terms do not have senses. Neo-descriptivists, especially Frank Jackson and David Chalmers, believe that this view is mistaken. Merging classical descriptivism with a Kaplan-inspired two-dimensional framework, neo-descriptivists devise a semantics for natural kind terms that assigns natural kind terms so-called 'primary intensions'. Since primary intensions are senses by other names, Jackson and Chalmers conclude that we can and should do metaphysics of nature by analysing the natural kind concepts competent speakers possess. I argue that neo-descriptivism does not provide a suitable basis for doing this kind of metaphysics. I first of all give a detailed account of the neo-descriptivist semantics and deflate the intuitive support neo-descriptivists try to draw from their case of the XYZ-world. I then present three arguments -- the Argument from Ignorance, the Argument from Conceptual Analysis, and the Argument from Laziness. Taken together, these arguments undermine the neo-descriptivist analysis of natural kind terms. I conclude that natural kind terms do not have senses, that we cannot do metaphysics of nature by analysing the senses of our kind terms, and that the Kripke-Putnam account still provides the best semantics for natural kind terms we have
|Keywords||Dimension Logic Natural Kinds Semantics Term Chalmers, D Jackson, F|
|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
Max Kistler (2005). Réduction «Rôle-Occupant», Réduction «Micro-Macro» Et Explication Réductrice a Priori. Dialogue 44 (2):225-248.
Similar books and articles
Harry Deutsch (1994). Semantic Analysis of Natural Kind Terms. Topoi 13 (1):25-30.
Corine Besson (2010). Rigidity, Natural Kind Terms, and Metasemantics. In Helen Beebee & Nigel Sabbarton-Leary (eds.), The Semantics and Metaphysics of Natural Kinds. Routledge 25--44.
Asa Maria Wikforss (2005). Naming Natural Kinds. Synthese 145 (1):65-87.
Kathrin Koslicki (2008). Natural Kinds and Natural Kind Terms. Philosophy Compass 3 (4):789-802.
Mohan Matthen (1984). Ostension, Names and Natural Kind Terms. Dialogue 23 (1):44-58.
Corine Besson (2012). Empty Natural Kind Terms and Dry-Earth. Erkenntnis 76 (3):403-425.
Sören Häggqvist & Åsa Wikforss (2007). Externalism and a Posteriori Semantics. Erkenntnis 67 (3):373 - 386.
Nigel Sabbarton-Leary (2010). Descriptivist Reference From Metaphysical Essence. Dialectica 64 (3):419-433.
J. Brown (1998). Natural Kind Terms and Recognitional Capacities. Mind 107 (426):275-303.
Richard Gray (2006). Natural Phenomenon Terms. Analysis 66 (290):141–148.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads160 ( #25,629 of 1,940,952 )
Recent downloads (6 months)38 ( #11,078 of 1,940,952 )
How can I increase my downloads?