5 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Ross Inman (Saint Louis University, University of Notre Dame)
  1. Ross Inman (2014). De Re Essentialism, Species, and Modal Ambiguity. Metaphysica 15 (1).
    I offer a concise critique of a recurring line of reasoning advanced by Joseph LaPorte and Samir Okasha that all modern species concepts render the view that biological organisms essentially belong to their species empirically untenable. The argument, I claim, trades on a crucial modal ambiguity that collapses the de re/de dicto distinction. Contra their claim that the continued adherence of such a view on behalf of contemporary metaphysicians stems from the latter’s ignorance of developments in modern biology, the modal (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Ross Inman (2014). Neo-Aristotelian Plenitude. Philosophical Studies 168 (3):583-597.
    Plenitude, roughly, the thesis that for any non-empty region of spacetime there is a material object that is exactly located at that region, is often thought to be part and parcel of the standard Lewisian package in the metaphysics of persistence. While the wedding of plentitude and Lewisian four-dimensionalism is a natural one indeed, there are a hand-full of dissenters who argue against the notion that Lewisian four-dimensionalism has exclusive rights to plentitude. These ‘promiscuous’ three-dimensionalists argue that a temporalized version (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Ross Inman (2013). Gratuitous Evil Unmotivated: A Reply to MacGregor. Philosophia Christi 15 (2):435-445.
    In his article “The Existence and Irrelevance of Gratuitous Evil,” Kirk R. MacGregor has argued that the Christian theist need not demur at the existence of gratuitous evil. In fact, we are told that Christian theists have ample philosophical, theological, and biblical evidence in favor of the existence of gratuitous evil. In this brief note I examine both the general structure of his argument as well as several of his more central arguments in favor of gratuitous evil and the compatibility (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Ross Inman (2012). Essential Dependence, Truthmaking, and Mereology: Then and Now. In Lukas Novak, Daniel D. Novotny, Prokop Sousedik & David Svoboda (eds.), Metaphysics: Aristotelian, Scholastic, Analytic. Ontos Verlag. 73-90.
    One notable area in analytic metaphysics that has seen a revival of Aristotelian and scho- lastic inspired metaphysics is the return to a more robust construal of the notion of essence, what some have labelled “real” or “serious” essentialism. However, it is only recently that this more robust notion of essence has been implemented into the debate on truthmaking, mainly by the work of E. J. Lowe. The first part of the paper sets out to explore the scholastic roots of (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Ross Inman (2012). Why so Serious? Non-Serious Presentism and the Problem of Cross-Temporal Relations. Metaphysica 13 (1):55-63.
    It is a common assumption in the metaphysics of time that a commitment to presentism entails a commitment to serious presentism, the view that objects can exemplify properties or stand in relations only at times at which they exist. As a result, non-serious presentism is widely thought to be beyond the bounds for the card-carrying presentist in response to the problem of cross-temporal relations. In this paper, I challenge this general consensus by examining one common argument in favor of the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation