Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'works', 'The Evolution of Physics' and 'Senses of Essence'

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

---

10 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.

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.

27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 2. Electrodynamics / b. Fields

18202	The concept of a field gradually replaced the substances in explaining relations between charges [Einstein/Infeld]
	Full Idea: In the beginning the field concept was no more than a means of facilitating the understanding of phenomena. ...In the new field language it is the field and not the charges themselves which is essential. The substance was overshadowed by the field.
	From: Einstein,A/Infeld,L (The Evolution of Physics [1938], p.151), quoted by Penelope Maddy - Naturalism in Mathematics II.4
	A reaction: This is very important for philosophical metaphysicians, especially those like me who want to explain the universe by the nature of the stuff that composes it. The 'stuff' had better not be simplistic individual 'substances'.

29. Religion / B. Monotheistic Religion / 4. Christianity / d. Heresy

16713	Philosophers are the forefathers of heretics [Tertullian]
	Full Idea: Philosophers are the forefathers of heretics.
	From: Tertullian (works [c.200]), quoted by Robert Pasnau - Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 20.2

29. Religion / D. Religious Issues / 1. Religious Commitment / e. Fideism

6610	I believe because it is absurd [Tertullian]
	Full Idea: I believe because it is absurd ('Credo quia absurdum est').
	From: Tertullian (works [c.200]), quoted by Robert Fogelin - Walking the Tightrope of Reason n4.2
	A reaction: This seems to be a rather desperate remark, in response to what must have been rather good hostile arguments. No one would abandon the support of reason if it was easy to acquire. You can't deny its engaging romantic defiance, though.