more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Modern essentialists would insist that any two members of the same natural kind must be identical in all essential respects.
Gist of Idea
For essentialists two members of a natural kind must be identical
Source
Brian Ellis (The Philosophy of Nature: new essentialism [2002], Ch.1)
Book Ref
Ellis,Brian: 'The Philosophy of Nature: new essentialism' [Acumen 2002], p.14
A Reaction
For this reason, animals no longer qualify as natural kinds, but electrons, gold atoms, and water molecules do. My sticking point is when anyone asserts that an electron necessarily has (say) its mass. Why no close counterpart of electrons?
| 12375 | Whatever holds of a kind intrinsically holds of it necessarily [Aristotle] |
| 5446 | For essentialists two members of a natural kind must be identical [Ellis] |
| 5480 | The whole of our world is a natural kind, so all worlds like it necessarily have the same laws [Ellis] |
| 17053 | Gold's atomic number might not be 79, but if it is, could non-79 stuff be gold? [Kripke] |
| 4964 | 'Cats are animals' has turned out to be a necessary truth [Kripke] |
| 15292 | We can base the idea of a natural kind on the mechanisms that produce natural necessity [Harré/Madden] |
| 11907 | Maybe the identity of kinds is necessary, but instances being of that kind is not [Mackie,P] |