Why essentialism requires two senses of necessity

Ratio 19 (1):77–91 (2006)
Authors
Stephen K. McLeod
University of Liverpool
Abstract
I set up a dilemma, concerning metaphysical modality de re, for the essentialist opponent of a ‘two senses’ view of necessity. I focus specifically on Frank Jackson's two-dimensional account in his From Metaphysics to Ethics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998). I set out the background to Jackson's conception of conceptual analysis and his rejection of a two senses view. I proceed to outline two purportedly objective (as opposed to epistemic) differences between metaphysical and logical necessity. I conclude that since one of these differences must hold and since each requires the adoption of a two senses view of necessity, essentialism is not consistent with the rejection of a two senses view.
Keywords essentialism  necessity  Frank Jackson
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9329.2006.00310.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

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

Essence and Modality.Kit Fine - 1994 - Philosophical Perspectives 8:1-16.
Naming and Necessity.Saul Kripke - 1980 - In Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel (eds.), Philosophy. Routledge. pp. 431-433.
Sameness and Substance Renewed.David Wiggins - 2001 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
134 ( #45,729 of 2,293,762 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
13 ( #36,527 of 2,293,762 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature