Search results for 'Categorical properties' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Robert Schroer (2012). Two Challenges That Categorical Properties Pose to Physicalism. Ratio 25 (2):195-206.score: 90.0
    What are physical objects like when they are considered independently of their causal interactions? Many think that the answer to this question involves categorical propertiesproperties that make contributions to their bearers that are independent of any causal interactions those objects may enter into. In this paper, I examine two challenges that this solution poses to Physicalism. The first challenge is that, given that they are distinct from any of the scientifically described causal powers that they happen (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Benjamin Smart, Categorical Properties in Background Independent Substantivalist General Relativity.score: 90.0
    Assuming the increasingly popular background independent substantivalist interpretation of general relativity (GR), in this paper I show that the possibility of spacetime point permutations implies that the locational properties of spacetime points, and structural properties of spacetime are categorical. Categorical properties, however, are often deemed implausible by dispositional monists (Bird 2007; Mumford 2004) due to their quiddistic nature, as their primitive identity entails the unacceptable possibility of properties changing their causal role across possible worlds. (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Robert Schroer (2013). Can a Single Property Be Both Dispositional and Categorical? The “Partial Consideration Strategy”, Partially Considered. Metaphysica 14 (1):63-77.score: 63.0
    One controversial position in the debate over dispositional and categorical properties maintains that our concepts of these properties are the result of partially considering unitary properties that are both dispositional and categorical. As one of its defenders (Heil 2005, p. 351) admits, this position is typically met with “incredulous stares”. In this paper, I examine whether such a reaction is warranted. This thesis about properties is an instance of what I call “the Partial Consideration (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Brian Ellis (2010). Causal Powers and Categorical Properties. In Anna Marmodoro (ed.), The Metaphysics of Powers: Their Grounding and Their Manifestations. Routledge.score: 60.0
    The aim of this paper is to argue that there are categorical properties as well as causal powers, and that the world would not exist as we know it without them. For categorical properties are needed to define the powers—to locate them, and to specify their laws of action. These categorical properties, I shall argue, are not dispositional. For their identities do not depend on what they dispose their bearers to do. They are, as (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. James Franklin (1986). Are Dispositions Reducible to Categorical Properties? Philosophical Quarterly 36 (142):62-64.score: 60.0
    Dispostions, such as solubility, cannont be reduced to categorical properties, such as molecular structure, without some element of dipositionaity remaining. Democritus did not reduce all properties to the geometry of atoms - he had to retain the rigidity of the atoms, that is, their disposition not to change shape when a force is applied. So dispositions-not-to, like rigidity, cannot be eliminated. Neither can dispositions-to, like solubility.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Matthew Tugby (2013). Categoricalism, Dispositionalism, and the Epistemology of Properties. Synthese 191 (6):1-16.score: 60.0
    Notoriously, the dispositional view of natural properties is thought to face a number of regress problems, one of which points to an epistemological worry. In this paper, I argue that the rival categorical view is also susceptible to the same kind of regress problem. This problem can be overcome, most plausibly, with the development of a structuralist epistemology. After identifying problems faced by alternative solutions, I sketch the main features of this structuralist epistemological approach, referring to graph-theoretic modelling (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Sharon R. Ford (2012). The Categorical-Dispositional Distinction. In Alexander Bird, Brian Ellis & Howard Sankey (eds.), Properties, Powers and Structures: Issues in the Metaphysics of Realism. Routledge.score: 57.0
    This paper largely engages with Brian Ellis’s description of categorical dimensions as put forward in his paper in this volume. The New Essentialism advocated by Ellis posits the ontologically-robust existence of both dispositional and categorical properties. I have argued that the distinction that Ellis draws between the two is unpersuasive, and that the causal role of categorical dimensions—what they do—is inseparable from what they are. This observation is reinforced by the fact that absolute physical quantities permit (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Sharon R. Ford (2010). What Fundamental Properties Suffice to Account for the Manifest World? Powerful Structure. Dissertation, University of Queenslandscore: 54.0
    This Thesis engages with contemporary philosophical controversies about the nature of dispositional properties or powers and the relationship they have to their non-dispositional counterparts. The focus concerns fundamentality. In particular, I seek to answer the question, ‘What fundamental properties suffice to account for the manifest world?’ The answer I defend is that fundamental categorical properties need not be invoked in order to derive a viable explanation for the manifest world. My stance is a field-theoretic view which (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Brendan O'Sullivan (2012). Absent Qualia and Categorical Properties. Erkenntnis 76 (3):353-371.score: 48.0
    Qualia have proved difficult to integrate into a broadly physicalistic worldview. In this paper, I argue that despite popular wisdom in the philosophy of mind, qualia’s intrinsicality is not sufficient for their non-reducibility. Second, I diagnose why philosophers mistakenly focused on intrinsicality. I then proceed to argue that qualia are categorical and end with some reflections on how the conceptual territory looks when we keep our focus on categoricity.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Sharon R. Ford (2011). Deriving the Manifestly Qualitative World From a Pure-Power Base: Light-Like Networks. Philosophia Scientiae 15 (3):155-175.score: 45.0
    Seeking to derive the manifestly qualitative world of objects and entities without recourse to fundamental categoricity or qualitativity, I offer an account of how higher-order categorical properties and objects may emerge from a pure-power base. I explore the possibility of ‘fields’ whose fluctuations are force-carrying entities, differentiated with respect to a micro-topology of curled-up spatial dimensions. Since the spacetime paths of gauge bosons have zero ‘spacetime interval’ and no time-like extension, I argue that according them the status of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Robert Schroer (2010). How Far Can the Physical Sciences Reach? American Philosophical Quarterlly 47 (3):253-266.score: 45.0
    : It is widely thought that dispositional properties depend upon categorical properties; specifying the nature of this dependency, however, has proven a difficult task. The dependency of dispositional properties upon categorical properties also presents a challenge to the thesis of Physicalism: If the physical sciences only tell us about the dispositional properties of the objects they study and if dispositional properties depend upon categorical properties, then it appears that there will (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Randolph Clarke (2010). Opposing Powers. Philosophical Studies 149 (2):153 - 160.score: 45.0
    A disposition mask is something that prevents a disposition from manifesting despite the occurrence of that disposition’s characteristic stimulus, and without eliminating that disposition. Several authors have maintained that masks must be things extrinsic to the objects that have the masked dispositions. Here it is argued that this is not so; masks can be intrinsic to the objects whose dispositions they mask. If that is correct, then a recent attempt to distinguish dispositional properties from so-called categorical properties (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Brian Ellis (2005). Universals, the Essential Problem and Categorical Properties. Ratio 18 (4):462–472.score: 45.0
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Jerrold Levinson (1988). A Note on Categorical Properties and Contingent Identity. Journal of Philosophy 85 (12):718-722.score: 45.0
    Stephen Yablo has attempted recently to revive the notion of contingent identity, identifying this with a relation of L coincidence between objects that are "distinct by nature but the same in the circumstances" (296). Yablo argues convincingly for the need of essentialist metaphysics to recognize some relation of this sort, a relation of "intimate identity-like connections between things" (296) if it is to acknowledge properly the intuitive difference between (i) the nonidentity of a bust B and a hunk of wax (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. James Franklin (1988). Reply to Armstrong on Dispositions. Philosophical Quarterly 38 (150):86-87.score: 45.0
    Defends the arguments for the irredicibility of dispositions to categorical properties in "Are dispositions reducible to categorical properties?" (Philosophical Quarterly 36, 1986) against the criticisms of D.M. Armstrong (Philosophical Quarterly 38, 1988).
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. John H. Taylor (2013). In Defence of Powerful Qualities. Metaphysica 14 (1):93-107.score: 42.0
    The ontology of ‘powerful qualities’ is gaining an increasing amount of attention in the literature on properties. This is the view that the so-called categorical or qualitative properties are identical with ‘dispositional’ properties. The position is associated with C.B. Martin, John Heil, Galen Strawson and Jonathan Jacobs. Robert Schroer ( 2012 ) has recently mounted a number of criticisms against the powerful qualities view as conceived by these main adherents, and has also advanced his own (radically (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Sharon R. Ford (2007). An Analysis of Properties in John Heil’s "From an Ontological Point of View&Quot;. In G. Romano & Malatesti (eds.), From an Ontological Point of View, SWIF Philosophy of Mind Review, Symposium. SWIF Philosophy of Mind Review.score: 42.0
    In this paper I argue that the requirement for the qualitative is theory-dependent, determined by the fundamental assumptions built into the ontology. John Heil’s qualitative, in its role as individuator of objects and powers, is required only by a theory that posits a world of distinct objects or powers. Does Heil’s ‘deep’ view of the world, such that there is only one powerful object (e.g. a field containing modes or properties which we perceive as manifest everyday objects) require the (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. George Voutsadakis (2003). Categorical Abstract Algebraic Logic Metalogical Properties. Studia Logica 74 (3):369 - 398.score: 39.0
    Metalogical properties that have traditionally been studied in the deductive system context (see, e.g., [21]) and transferred later to the institution context [33], are here formulated in the -institution context. Preservation under deductive equivalence of -institutions is investigated. If a property is known to hold in all algebraic -institutions and is preserved under deductive equivalence, then it follows that it holds in all algebraizable -institutions in the sense of [36].
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. R. Brown, J. F. Glazebrook & I. C. Baianu (2007). A Conceptual Construction of Complexity Levels Theory in Spacetime Categorical Ontology: Non-Abelian Algebraic Topology, Many-Valued Logics and Dynamic Systems. [REVIEW] Axiomathes 17 (3-4):409-493.score: 36.0
    A novel conceptual framework is introduced for the Complexity Levels Theory in a Categorical Ontology of Space and Time. This conceptual and formal construction is intended for ontological studies of Emergent Biosystems, Super-complex Dynamics, Evolution and Human Consciousness. A claim is defended concerning the universal representation of an item’s essence in categorical terms. As an essential example, relational structures of living organisms are well represented by applying the important categorical concept of natural transformations to biomolecular reactions and (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Robert Schroer (2010). Is There More Than One Categorical Property? Philosophical Quarterly 60 (241):831-850.score: 36.0
    I develop a new theory of properties by considering two central arguments in the debate whether properties are dispositional or categorical. The first claims that objects must possess categorical properties in order to be distinct from empty space. The second argument, however, points out several untoward consequences of positing categorical properties. I explore these arguments and argue that despite appearances, their conclusions need not be in conflict with one another. In particular, we can (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. William A. Bauer (2012). Four Theories of Pure Dispositions. In Alexander Bird, Brian Ellis & Howard Sankey (eds.), Properties, Powers, and Structures: Issues in the Metaphysics of Realism. Routledge. 139-162.score: 36.0
    The dispositional properties encountered in everyday experience seem to have causal bases in other properties, e.g., the microstructure of a vase is the causal basis of its fragility. In contrast, the Pure Dispositions Thesis maintains that some dispositions require no causal basis. This thesis faces the Problem of Being: without a causal basis, there appears to be no grounds for the existence of pure dispositions. This paper establishes criteria for evaluating the problem, critically examines four theories of the (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Ullin T. Place (1996). Structural Properties: Categorical, Dispositional, or Both. In Tim Crane (ed.), Dispositions: A Debate. New York: Routledge. 105--125.score: 36.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Jw Rosenthal & A. S. H. Cj (1986). AHLBRANDT, G. And ZIEGLER, M., Quasi Finitely Axiomatiz-Able Totally Categorical Theories ASH, CJ and ROSENTHAL, JW, Intersections of Algebraically Closed Fields BAUDISCH, A., On Elementary Properties of Free Lie Algebras. [REVIEW] Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 30:321.score: 36.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Troy Cross (2012). Goodbye, Humean Supervenience. Oxford Studies in Metaphysics 7:129-153.score: 30.0
    Reductionists about dispositions must either say the natural properties are all dispositional or individuate properties hyperintensionally. Lewis stands in as an example of the sort of combination I think is incoherent: properties individuated by modal profile + categoricalism.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Agustín Vicente (2011). Functions and Emergence: When Functional Properties Have Something to Say. Philosophical Studies 152 (2):293-312.score: 30.0
    In a recent paper, Bird (in: Groff (ed.) Revitalizing causality: Realism about causality in philosophy and social science, 2007 ) has argued that some higher-order properties—which he calls “evolved emergent properties”—can be considered causally efficacious in spite of exclusion arguments. I have previously argued in favour of a similar position. The basic argument is that selection processes do not take physical categorical properties into account. Rather, selection mechanisms are only tuned to what such properties can (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Simone Gozzano (2012). Scientific Essentialism and the Mental. Rivista di Filosofia 103 (2):201-226.score: 30.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Vera Hoffmann-Kolss (2010). The Metaphysics of Extrinsic Properties. Ontos-Verlag.score: 27.0
    This book aims to develop a philosophical theory of extrinsic properties – of properties whose instantiation by an object does not only depend on what the object itself is like, but also on features of its environment. Various accounts of the intrinsic/extrinsic distinction are analysed in detail, and it is argued that the most promising approach to defining this distinction is to consider extrinsic properties as a particular type of relational property. Moreover, it is shown that two (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Andreas Bartels (2013). Why Metrical Properties Are Not Powers. Synthese 190 (12):2001-2013.score: 27.0
    What has the dispositional analysis of properties and laws (e.g. Molnar, Powers, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003; Mumford, Laws in nature, Routledge London, 2004; Bird, Nature’s metaphysics, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2007) to offer to the scientific understanding of physical properties?—The article provides an answer to this question for the case of spacetime points and their metrical properties in General Relativity. The analysis shows that metrical properties are not ‘powers’, i.e. they cannot be understood as producing the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Krzysztof Krupiński (2011). On Relationships Between Algebraic Properties of Groups and Rings in Some Model-Theoretic Contexts. Journal of Symbolic Logic 76 (4):1403-1417.score: 27.0
    We study relationships between certain algebraic properties of groups and rings definable in a first order structure or *-closed in a compact G-space. As a consequence, we obtain a few structural results about ω-categorical rings as well as about small, nm-stable compact G-rings, and we also obtain surprising relationships between some conjectures concerning small profinite groups.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Tyler Hildebrand (2014). Can Bare Dispositions Explain Categorical Regularities? Philosophical Studies 167 (3):569-584.score: 24.0
    One of the traditional desiderata for a metaphysical theory of laws of nature is that it be able to explain natural regularities. Some philosophers have postulated governing laws to fill this explanatory role. Recently, however, many have attempted to explain natural regularities without appealing to governing laws. Suppose that some fundamental properties are bare dispositions. In virtue of their dispositional nature, these properties must be (or are likely to be) distributed in regular patterns. Thus it would appear that (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Mauro Dorato, Properties and Dispositions: Some Metaphysical Remarks on Quantum Ontology.score: 24.0
    After some suggestions about how to clarify the confused metaphysical distinctions between dispositional and non-dispositional or categorical properties, I review some of the main interpretations of QM in order to show that – with the relevant exception of Bohm’s minimalist interpretation – quantum ontology is irreducibly dispositional. Such an irreducible character of dispositions must be explained differently in different interpretations, but the reducibility of the contextual properties in the case of Bohmian mechanics is guaranteed by the fact (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Sungho Choi (2005). Do Categorical Ascriptions Entail Counterfactual Conditionals? Philosophical Quarterly 55 (220):495–503.score: 24.0
    Stephen Mumford, in his book on dispositions, argues that we can distinguish between dispositional and categorical properties in terms of entailing his 'conditional conditionals', which involve the concept of ideal conditions. I aim at defending Mumford's criterion for distinguishing between dispositional and categorical properties. To be specific, no categorical ascriptions entail Mumford's 'conditional conditionals'.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Mauro Dorato, Dispositions, Relational Properties and the Quantum World.score: 24.0
    In this paper I examine the role of dispositional properties in the most frequently discussed interpretations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics. After offering some motivation for this project, I briefly characterize the distinction between non-dispositional and dispositional properties in the context of quantum mechanics by suggesting a necessary condition for dispositionality – namely contextuality – and, consequently, a sufficient condition for non-dispositionality, namely non-contextuality. Having made sure that the distinction is conceptually sound, I then analyze the plausibility of the (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Chuang Liu (1996). Potential, Propensity, and Categorical Realism. Erkenntnis 45 (1):45 - 68.score: 24.0
    I argue that categorical realism, contrary to what most believe today, holds for quantum (and indeed for all) objects and substances. The main argument consists of two steps: (i) the recent experimental verification of the AB effect gives strong empirical evidence for taking quantum potentials as physically real (or substantival), which suggests a change of the data upon which any viable interpretation of quantum theory must rely, and (ii) quantum potentials may be consistently taken as the categorical (...) of quantum objects so that categorical realism can be restored. (shrink)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Douglas E. Ensley (1996). Automorphism-Invariant Measures on ℵ0-Categorical Structures Without the Independence Property. Journal of Symbolic Logic 61 (2):640 - 652.score: 24.0
    We address the classification of the possible finitely-additive probability measures on the Boolean algebra of definable subsets of M which are invariant under the natural action of $\operatorname{Aut}(M)$ . This pursuit requires a generalization of Shelah's forking formulas [8] to "essentially measure zero" sets and an application of Myer's "rank diagram" [5] of the Boolean algebra under consideration. The classification is completed for a large class of ℵ 0 -categorical structures without the independence property including those which are stable.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. George Voutsadakis (2005). Categorical Abstract Algebraic Logic: Gentzen Π ‐Institutions and the Deduction‐Detachment Property. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 51 (6):570-578.score: 24.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. John Heil & David Robb (2003). Mental Properties. American Philosophical Quarterly 40 (3):175-196.score: 23.0
    It is becoming increasingly clear that the deepest problems currently exercising philosophers of mind arise from an ill-begotten ontology, in particular, a mistaken ontology of properties. After going through some preliminaries, we identify three doctrines at the heart of this mistaken ontology: (P) For each distinct predicate, “F”, there exists one, and only one, property, F, such that, if “F” is applicable to an object a, then “F” is applicable in virtue of a’s being F. (U) Properties are (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. David M. Armstrong (2005). Four Disputes About Properties. Synthese 144 (3):1-12.score: 21.0
    In considering the nature of properties four controversial decisions must be made. (1) Are properties universals or tropes? (2) Are properties attributes of particulars, or are particulars just bundles of properties? (3) Are properties categorical (qualitative) in nature, or are they powers? (4) If a property attaches to a particular, is this predication contingent, or is it necessary? These choices seem to be in a great degree independent of each other. The author indicates his (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Peter Menzies (forthcoming). Critical Notice of Alexander Bird, Nature's Metaphysics: Laws and Properties. Analysis.score: 21.0
    This book advocates dispositional essentialism, the view that natural properties have dispositional essences.1 So, for example, the essence of the property of being negatively charged is to be disposed to attract positively charged objects. From this fact it follows that it is a law that all negatively charged objects will attract positively 10 charged objects; and indeed that this law is metaphysically necessary. Since the identity of the property of being negatively charged is determined by its being related in (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Sungho Choi (2012). Intrinsic Finks and Dispositional/Categorical Distinction. Noûs 46 (2):289-325.score: 21.0
    The central theme of this paper is the dispositional/categorical distinction that has been one of the top agendas in contemporary metaphysics. I will first develop from my semantic account of dispositions what I think the correct formulation of the dispositional/categorical distinction in terms of counterfactual conditionals. It will be argued that my formulation does not have the shortcomings that have plagued previously proposed ones. Then I will turn my attention to one of its consequences, the thesis that dispositional (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. George Voutsadakis (2006). Categorical Abstract Algebraic Logic: More on Protoalgebraicity. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 47 (4):487-514.score: 21.0
    Protoalgebraic logics are characterized by the monotonicity of the Leibniz operator on their theory lattices and are at the lower end of the Leibniz hierarchy of abstract algebraic logic. They have been shown to be the most primitive among those logics with a strong enough algebraic character to be amenable to algebraic study techniques. Protoalgebraic π-institutions were introduced recently as an analog of protoalgebraic sentential logics with the goal of extending the Leibniz hierarchy from the sentential framework to the π-institution (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. George Voutsadakis (2005). Categorical Abstract Algebraic Logic: Models of Π-Institutions. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 46 (4):439-460.score: 21.0
    An important part of the theory of algebraizable sentential logics consists of studying the algebraic semantics of these logics. As developed by Czelakowski, Blok, and Pigozzi and Font and Jansana, among others, it includes studying the properties of logical matrices serving as models of deductive systems and the properties of abstract logics serving as models of sentential logics. The present paper contributes to the development of the categorical theory by abstracting some of these model theoretic aspects and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Alexander Bird, B. D. Ellis & Howard Sankey (eds.) (2012). Properties, Powers, and Structures: Issues in the Metaphysics of Realism. Routledge.score: 21.0
    While the phrase "metaphysics of science" has been used from time to time, it has only recently begun to denote a specific research area where metaphysics meets philosophy of science—and the sciences themselves. The essays in this volume demonstrate that metaphysics of science is an innovative field of research in its own right. The principal areas covered are: (1) The modal metaphysics of properties: What is the essential nature of natural properties? Are all properties essentially categorical? (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Todd Buras (2006). Counterpart Theory, Natural Properties, and Essentialism. Journal of Philosophy 103 (1):27-42.score: 18.0
    David Lewis advised essentialists to judge his counterpart theory a false friend. He also argued that counterpart theory needs natural properties. This essay argues that natural properties are all essentialists need to find a true friend in counterpart theory. Section one explains why Lewis takes counterpart theory to be anti-essentialist and why he thinks it needs natural properties. Section two establishes the connection between the natural properties counterpart theory needs and the essentialist consequences Lewis disavows. Section (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Alexander Bird (2005). The Dispositionalist Conception of Laws. Foundations of Science 10 (4):353-70.score: 18.0
    This paper sketches a dispositionalist conception of laws and shows how the dispositionalist should respond to certain objections. The view that properties are essentially dispositional is able to provide an account of laws that avoids the problems that face the two views of laws (the regularity and the contingent nomic necessitation views) that regard properties as categorical and laws as contingent. I discuss and reject the objections that (i) this view makes laws necessary whereas they are contingent; (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Alexander Bird (2005). Laws and Essences. Ratio 18 (4):437–461.score: 18.0
    Those who favour an ontology based on dispositions are thereby able to provide a dispositional essentialist account of the laws of nature. In part 1 of this paper I sketch the dispositional essentialist conception of properties and the concomitant account of laws. In part 2, I characterise various claims about the modal character of properties that fall under the heading ‘quidditism’ and which are consequences of the categoricalist view of properties, which is the alternative to the dispositional (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Bart Streumer (2008). Are There Irreducibly Normative Properties? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):537-561.score: 18.0
    Frank Jackson has argued that, given plausible claims about supervenience, descriptive predicates and property identity, there are no irreducibly normative properties. Philosophers who think that there are such properties have made several objections to this argument. In this paper, I argue that all of these objections fail. I conclude that Jackson's argument shows that there are no irreducibly normative properties.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Tuomas E. Tahko (2013). Tropes: Properties, Objects, and Mental Causation. By Douglas Ehring. [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 63 (251):379-382.score: 18.0
    Book review of 'Tropes: Properties, Objects, and Mental Causation' (2011, OUP). By DOUGLAS EHRING.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Bart Streumer (2013). Why There Really Are No Irreducibly Normative Properties. In David Bakhurst, Brad Hooker & Margaret Olivia Little (eds.), Thinking about Reasons: Themes from the Philosophy of Jonathan Dancy. OUP. 310-336.score: 18.0
    Jonathan Dancy thinks that there are irreducibly normative properties. Frank Jackson has given a well-known argument against this view, and I have elsewhere defended this argument against many objections, including one made by Dancy. But Dancy remains unconvinced. In this chapter, I hope to convince him.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Jacqueline Mariña (1998). Kant's Derivation of the Formula of the Categorical Imperative: How to Get It Right. Kant-Studien 89 (2):167-178.score: 18.0
    This paper explores the charge by Bruce Aune and Allen Wood that a gap exists in Kant's derivation of the Categorical Imperative. I show that properly understood, no such gap exists, and that the deduction of the Categorical Imperative is successful as it stands.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000