more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Our ranking, and distinguishing natural substances into species consists in the nominal essences the mind makes, and not in the real essences to be found in things themselves.
Gist of Idea
We distinguish species by their nominal essence, not by their real essence
Source
John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694], 3.06.11)
Book Ref
Locke,John: 'Essay Concerning Human Understanding', ed/tr. Nidditch,P.H. [OUP 1979], p.444
A Reaction
Note that, as far as I can see, Locke never denies the existence of real essences, or even that we might occasionally know them. He is here merely describing, fairly accurately, I think, his empiricist view of how these categories have come about.
Related Idea
Idea 12531 Nominal Essence is the abstract idea to which a name is attached [Locke]
| 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] |