In defence of modal essentialism.
Saved in:
| Title: | In defence of modal essentialism. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Livingstone-Banks, Jonathan1 (AUTHOR) J.Liv.Banks@Gmail.com |
| Source: | Inquiry. Nov2017, Vol. 60 Issue 8, p816-838. 23p. |
| Subject Terms: | Linguistics, Essentialism (Philosophy), Modality (Linguistics) |
| Abstract: | Kit Fine’s arguments inEssence and Modalityare widely accepted as being a decisive blow against modal essentialism. A selection of replies exist that have done little to counter the general view that modally construed essence is out of touch with what we really mean when we make essentialist claims. I argue that Fine’s arguments fail to strike a decisive blow, and I suggest a new interpretation of the debate that shows why Fine’s arguments fall short of achieving their goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Inquiry is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
Be the first to leave a comment!
