more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
What other qualities necessarily co-exist with a substance we cannot know, unless we can discover their natural dependence; which in their primary qualities we can go but a very little way in, and in secondary qualities we know no connexion at all.
Gist of Idea
We can only slightly know necessary co-existence of qualities, if they are primary
Source
John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694], 4.06.07)
Book Ref
Locke,John: 'Essay Concerning Human Understanding', ed/tr. Nidditch,P.H. [OUP 1979], p.582
A Reaction
His concept of essence is precisely that which gives rise to the collection of a thing's properties, so his doubts here are consistent. I take the modern position to be an optimist reading of Locke, that actually we can identify the substances.
| 15107 | Aristotle doesn't see essential truths or essential properties as necessary [Aristotle, by Koslicki] |
| 17039 | The predicates of a thing's nature are necessary to it [Aristotle] |
| 12560 | We can only slightly know necessary co-existence of qualities, if they are primary [Locke] |
| 11997 | A property may belong essentially to one thing and contingently to another [Kung] |
| 13806 | Trivially essential properties are existence, self-identity, and de dicto necessities [Forbes,G] |
| 15172 | Clearly, essential predications express necessary properties [Sidelle] |
| 15687 | Kinship is essence that comes in degrees, and age groups are essences that change over time [Gelman] |
| 15112 | If an object exists, then its essential properties are necessary [Koslicki] |
| 19262 | Essential properties are necessary, but necessary properties may not be essential [Vaidya] |