Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'God and Human Attributes', 'Conceptions of Truth' and 'Senses of Essence'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts

---

9 ideas

2. Reason / D. Definition / 6. Definition by Essence

11178	The essence or definition of an essence involves either a class of properties or a class of propositions [Fine,K]
	Full Idea: If each object has a unique essence or definition, this may be identified with either the class of properties that it essentially has, or with the class of propositions that are true in virtue of what it is.
	From: Kit Fine (Senses of Essence [1995], §8)
	A reaction: Elsewhere Fine says that it is easier to work with the propositions view, but that the properties (or predicates) view is probably more fundamental. He goes on here to raise the question of whether either view makes the essence unique.

2. Reason / D. Definition / 12. Paraphrase

18491	The idea of 'making' can be mere conceptual explanation (like 'because') [Künne]
	Full Idea: If we say 'being a child of our parent's sibling makes him your first cousin', that can be paraphrased using 'because', and this is the 'because' of conceptual explanation: the second part elucidates the sense of the first part.
	From: Wolfgang Künne (Conceptions of Truth [2003], 3.5.2)
	A reaction: Fans of truth-making are certainly made uncomfortable by talk of 'what makes this a good painting' or 'this made my day'. They need a bit more sharpness to the concept of 'making' a truth.

5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 2. Logical Connectives / a. Logical connectives

11175	Logical concepts rest on certain inferences, not on facts about implications [Fine,K]
	Full Idea: The nature of the logical concepts is given, not by certain logical truths, but by certain logical inferences. What properly belongs to disjunction is the inference from p to (p or q), rather than the fact that p implies (p or q).
	From: Kit Fine (Senses of Essence [1995], §3)
	A reaction: Does this mean that Fine is wickedly starting with the psychology, rather than with the pure truth of the connection? Frege is shuddering. This view seems to imply that the truth table for 'or' is secondary.

5. Theory of Logic / F. Referring in Logic / 3. Property (λ-) Abstraction

11176	The property of Property Abstraction says any suitable condition must imply a property [Fine,K]
	Full Idea: According to the principle of Property Abstraction, there is, for any suitable condition, a property that is possessed by an object just in case it conforms to the condition. This is usually taken to be a second-order logical truth.
	From: Kit Fine (Senses of Essence [1995], §4)
	A reaction: Fine objects that it is implied that if Socrates is essentially a man, then he essentially has the property of being a man. Like Fine, I think this conclusion is distasteful. A classification is not a property, at least the way most people use 'property'.

5. Theory of Logic / I. Semantics of Logic / 3. Logical Truth

11174	A logical truth is true in virtue of the nature of the logical concepts [Fine,K]
	Full Idea: One wants to define a logical truth as one that is true in virtue of the nature of the logical concepts.
	From: Kit Fine (Senses of Essence [1995], §3)
	A reaction: This is part of Fine's project to give a revised account of essence, which includes the essence of concepts as well as the essence of objects. Everyone should pay close attention to this project.

9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 1. Essences of Objects

11177	Can the essence of an object circularly involve itself, or involve another object? [Fine,K]
	Full Idea: Can the essence of an object (ineliminably) involve that object itself (perhaps through self-identity, giving a direct circularity), or have an indirect circularity involving two or more objects (such as admiration between Watson and Holmes).
	From: Kit Fine (Senses of Essence [1995], §7)
	A reaction: [compressed] This looks like one of the basic questions which any theory of essentialism must address.

9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 3. Individual Essences

11173	Being a man is a consequence of his essence, not constitutive of it [Fine,K]
	Full Idea: If we distinguish 'constitutive' from 'consequential' essence, ..then the essence of Socrates will, in part, be constituted by his being a man. But being a man (or a mountain) will merely be consequential upon, and not constitutive of, his essence.
	From: Kit Fine (Senses of Essence [1995], §3)
	A reaction: Yes yes yes. I think it is absurd to say that the class to which something belongs is part of its essential nature, given that it presumably can only belong to the class if it already has a certain essential nature. What did Frankenstein construct?

9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 4. Essence as Definition

11179	If there are alternative definitions, then we have three possibilities for essence [Fine,K]
	Full Idea: If there are alternative definitions for an essence, we must distinguish three notions. There is the essence as the manifold (the combined definitions), or as the range of alternative definitions (with component essences), or there is the common essence.
	From: Kit Fine (Senses of Essence [1995], §8)
	A reaction: Fine opts for the third alternative (what the definitions all have in common) as the best account. He says (p.68) 'definitive' properties come from one definition, and 'essential' properties from every possible definition.

28. God / B. Proving God / 2. Proofs of Reason / c. Moral Argument

20713	God must be fit for worship, but worship abandons morally autonomy, but there is no God [Rachels, by Davies,B]
	Full Idea: Rachels argues 1) If any being is God, he must be a fitting object of worship, 2) No being could be a fitting object of worship, since worship requires the abandonment of one's role as an autonomous moral agent, so 3) There cannot be a being who is God.
	From: report of James Rachels (God and Human Attributes [1971], 7 p.334) by Brian Davies - Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion 9 'd morality'
	A reaction: Presumably Lionel Messi can be a fitting object of worship without being God. Since the problem is with being worshipful, rather than with being God, should I infer that Messi doesn't exist?