Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Studies 148 (3):323 - 341 (2010)
|Abstract||It is generally agreed that dispositions cannot be analyzed in terms of simple subjunctive conditionals (because of what are called “masked dispositions” and “finkish dispositions”). I here defend a qualified subjunctive account of dispositions according to which an object is disposed to Φ when conditions C obtain if and only if, if conditions C were to obtain, then the object would Φ ceteris paribus . I argue that this account does not fall prey to the objections that have been raised in the literature.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
William W. Rozeboom (1973). Dispositions Revisited. Philosophy of Science 40 (1):59-74.
Jonathan L. Kvanvig (1999). Lewis on Finkish Dispositions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (3):703 - 710.
Andreas Hüttemann (2007). Causation, Laws and Dispositions. In Max Kistler & Bruno Gnassounou (eds.), Dispositions and Causal Powers. Ashgate.
Alice Drewery (2001). Dispositions and Ceteris Paribus Laws. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (4):723-733.
Sungho Choi (2009). The Conditional Analysis of Dispositions and the Intrinsic Dispositions Thesis. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 78 (3):568-590.
Michael Fara (2005). Dispositions and Habituals. Noûs 39 (1):43–82.
Markus Schrenk (2007). Can Capacities Rescue Us From Ceteris Paribus Laws? In B. Gnassounou & M. Kistler (eds.), Dispositions in Philosophy and Science. Ashgate.
Alexander Bird (2004). Antidotes All the Way Down? Theoria 19 (3):259-269.
Jonathan L. Kvanvig (1999). Lewis on Finkish Dispositions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (3):703-710.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads145 ( #3,632 of 739,315 )
Recent downloads (6 months)46 ( #1,434 of 739,315 )
How can I increase my downloads?