more on this theme     |     more from this text


Single Idea 11180

[filed under theme 9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 7. Essence and Necessity / b. Essence not necessities ]

Full Idea

In the range of modal systems for which Saul Kripke has provided a semantics, no essentialist sentence is a theorem. Furthermore, there are models for which such sentences are demonstrably false.

Gist of Idea

Essentialist sentences are not theorems of modal logic, and can even be false

Source

Ruth Barcan Marcus (Essential Attribution [1971], p.188)

Book Ref

-: 'Nous' [-], p.188


The 22 ideas from Ruth Barcan Marcus

Essentialist sentences are not theorems of modal logic, and can even be false [Marcus (Barcan)]
Aristotelian essentialism involves a 'natural' or 'causal' interpretation of modal operators [Marcus (Barcan)]
The use of possible worlds is to sort properties (not to individuate objects) [Marcus (Barcan)]
If essences are objects with only essential properties, they are elusive in possible worlds [Marcus (Barcan)]
Aristotelian essentialism is about shared properties, individuating essentialism about distinctive properties [Marcus (Barcan)]
'Essentially' won't replace 'necessarily' for vacuous properties like snub-nosed or self-identical [Marcus (Barcan)]
'Is essentially' has a different meaning from 'is necessarily', as they often cannot be substituted [Marcus (Barcan)]
In possible worlds, names are just neutral unvarying pegs for truths and predicates [Marcus (Barcan)]
Dispositional essences are special, as if an object loses them they cease to exist [Marcus (Barcan)]
Maybe a substitutional semantics for quantification lends itself to nominalism [Marcus (Barcan)]
Nominalists see proper names as a main vehicle of reference [Marcus (Barcan)]
Anything which refers tends to be called a 'name', even if it isn't a noun [Marcus (Barcan)]
Is being just referent of the verb 'to be'? [Marcus (Barcan)]
Nominalists say predication is relations between individuals, or deny that it refers [Marcus (Barcan)]
Quantifiers are needed to refer to infinitely many objects [Marcus (Barcan)]
Substitutional semantics has no domain of objects, but place-markers for substitutions [Marcus (Barcan)]
The nominalist is tied by standard semantics to first-order, denying higher-order abstracta [Marcus (Barcan)]
Substitutional language has no ontology, and is just a way of speaking [Marcus (Barcan)]
If objects are thoughts, aren't we back to psychologism? [Marcus (Barcan)]
Nominalists should quantify existentially at first-order, and substitutionally when higher [Marcus (Barcan)]
A true universal sentence might be substitutionally refuted, by an unnamed denumerable object [Marcus (Barcan)]
Substitutivity won't fix identity, because expressions may be substitutable, but not refer at all [Marcus (Barcan)]