Combining Philosophers

Ideas for H.Putnam/P.Oppenheim, Stewart Shapiro and Kathrin Koslicki

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these philosophers

display all the ideas for this combination of philosophers


7 ideas

9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 1. Essences of Objects
An essence and what merely follow from it are distinct [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: We can distinguish (as Aristotle and Fine do) between what belongs to the essence of an object, and what merely follows from the essence of an object.
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Essence, Necessity and Explanation [2012], 13.1)
     A reaction: This can help to clarify the confusions that result from treating necessary properties as if they were essential.
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 2. Types of Essence
Modern views want essences just to individuate things across worlds and times [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: According to the approach of Plantinga, Forbes and Mackie, the primary job of essences is to individuate the entities whose essences they are across worlds and times at which these entities exist.
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Varieties of Ontological Dependence [2012], 7.4 n13)
     A reaction: A helpful simplification of what is going on. I wish those authors would just say this one their first pages. They all get in a right tangle, because individuation is either too easy, or hopeless. 'Tracking' is a good word for this game.
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 3. Individual Essences
Individuals are perceived, but demonstration and definition require universals [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: Individual instances of a kind of phenomenon, in Aristotle's view, can only be perceived through sense-perception; but they are not the proper subject-matter of scientific demonstration and definition.
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Essence, Necessity and Explanation [2012], 13.3.1)
     A reaction: A footnote (11) explains that this is because they involve syllogisms, which require universals. I take Aristotle, and anyone sensible, to rest on individual essences, but inevitably turn to generic essences when language becomes involved.
Hylomorphic compounds need an individual form for transworld identity [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: It is difficult to see how forms could serve as cross-world identity principles for hylomorphic compounds, unless these forms are particular or individual entities.
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Form, Matter and Substance [2018], 3.4.3)
     A reaction: This is a key part of her objection to treating the form as universal or generic. I agree with her view.
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 4. Essence as Definition
For Fine, essences are propositions true because of identity, so they are just real definitions [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: Fine assumes that essences can be identified with collections of propositions that are true in virtue of the identity of a particular object, or objects. ...There is not, on this approach, much of a distinction between essences and real definitions.
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Varieties of Ontological Dependence [2012], 7.4)
     A reaction: This won't do, because the essence of a physical object is not a set of propositions, it is some aspects of the object itself, which are described in a definition. Koslicki notes that psuché is an essence, and the soul is hardly a set of propositions!
We need a less propositional view of essence, and so must distinguish it clearly from real definitions [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: To make room for a less propositional conception of essence than that assumed by Fine, I urge that we distinguish more firmly between essences and real definitions (which state these essences in the form of propositions).
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Varieties of Ontological Dependence [2012], 7.6)
     A reaction: Yes. The idea that essence is just a verbal or conceptual entity would be utterly abhorrent to Aristotle (a hero for Fine), and it is anathema to me too. We intend essences to be in the world (even if we are deceived about that). They explain!
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 7. Essence and Necessity / c. Essentials are necessary
If an object exists, then its essential properties are necessary [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: If an object has a certain property essentially, then it follows that the object has the property necessarily (if it exists).
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Essence, Necessity and Explanation [2012], 13.2)
     A reaction: She is citing Fine, who says that the converse (necessity implying essence) is false. I agree with that. I also willing to challenge the first bit. I suspect an object can retain identity and lose essence. Coma patient; broken clock; aged athlete.