David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 52 (4):591-607 (1985)
If one proposes to analyze dispositions by means of statements involving only the 'if-then' of material implication--that is, for example, to define 'x is soluble' by means of 'x is in water ⊃ x dissolves'--then one faces the problem first raised by Carnap, the match which is never put in water and which therefore turns out to be not only soluble but also both soluble and insoluble. I have elsewhere argued that if one refers to appropriate laws, then one can provide an account of disposition predication that solves Carnap's problem while requiring no sense of 'if-then' other than that of material implication. Harre and Madden have argued that a variant of this proposal--one in which the relevant law is restricted to one that relates the disposition to internal structures--is more adequate. It is argued that the proposal of Harre and Madden is in fact not adequate. It leads to an implausible infinite regress of dispositions and ever finer internal structures, which Harre and Madden avoid only by introducing "Parmenidean individuals." The examples they give turn out to involve dispositions not grounded in internal structures, and so support our analysis; while the explicit description of such individuals by Harre and Madden involves the incoherent idea that two individuals can share all categorical properties while differing in their dispositions. The position of Harre and Madden thus turns out to be equivalent to ours or to be incoherent.
|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
Brian Ellis (2007). Key Formulations. Critical Realism and Substance / Roy Wood Sellars; Causality and Substance / Roy Wood Sellars; Essence and Accident / Irving Copi; Conceptual and Natural Necessity / Rom Harre and E.H. Madden; Powers and Dispositions. [REVIEW] In Ruth Groff (ed.), Revitalizing Causality: Realism About Causality in Philosophy and Social Science. Routledge
W. Russ Payne (forthcoming). What a Law of Nature Is. Philosophical Explorations.
Randolph Clarke (2010). Opposing Powers. Philosophical Studies 149 (2):153 - 160.
Raymond Woller (1982). Harre and Madden's Multifarious Account of Natural Necessity. Philosophy of Science 49 (4):616-632.
E. H. Madden & R. Harré (1973). In Defence of Natural Agents. Philosophical Quarterly 23 (91):117-132.
R. Harré & E. H. Madden (1973). Natural Powers and Powerful Natures. Philosophy 48 (185):209 - 230.
Jennifer McKitrick (2003). The Bare Metaphysical Possibility of Bare Dispositions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (2):349–369.
Fred Wilson (1985). I. Addis on Analysing Disposition Concepts. Inquiry 28 (1-4):247-260.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads30 ( #128,570 of 1,793,162 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #280,900 of 1,793,162 )
How can I increase my downloads?