more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Philosophers sometimes invoke natural kinds as if they explain the possibility of explanation. This is characteristically neo-scholastic. That anything can be explained, and that properties cluster together, express one fact: reality is relatively stable.
Gist of Idea
Explanation by kinds and by clusters of properties just express the stability of reality
Source
J Ladyman / D Ross (Every Thing Must Go [2007], 5.6)
Book Ref
Ladyman,J/Ross,D: 'Every Thing Must Go' [OUP 2007], p.292
A Reaction
Odd idea. I would have thought that if there are indeed kinds and clusters, this would explain a great deal more than mere stability. Or, more accurately, they would invite a more substantial explanation than mere stability would seem to need.
15170 | We distinguish species by their nominal essence, not by their real essence [Locke] |
16937 | You can't base kinds just on resemblance, because chains of resemblance are a muddle [Quine] |
13583 | There might be uninstantiated natural kinds, such as transuranic elements which have never occurred [Ellis] |
11860 | Lawlike propensities are enough to individuate natural kinds [Wiggins] |
15693 | One sample of gold is enough, but one tree doesn't give the height of trees [Gelman] |
6769 | In the Kripke-Putnam view only nuclear physicists can know natural kinds [Bird] |
6774 | Darwinism suggests that we should have a native ability to detect natural kinds [Bird] |
14956 | Explanation by kinds and by clusters of properties just express the stability of reality [Ladyman/Ross] |
13285 | Natural kinds support inductive inferences, from previous samples to the next one [Koslicki] |