Single Idea 4799

[catalogued under 26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 8. Scientific Essentialism / e. Anti scientific essentialism]

Full Idea

Many philosophers will find dispositional essentialism unappealing, not least because it seems to fail to explain how (and in virtue of what) there is this supposed fundamental distinction between essential and non-essential properties.

Gist of Idea

Dispositional essentialism can't explain its key distinction between essential and non-essential properties

Source

Stathis Psillos (Causation and Explanation [2002])

Book Reference

Psillos,Stathis: 'Causation and Explanation' [Acumen 2002], p.175


A Reaction

Maybe there is no precise definition, but any idiot can see that some properties of gold are essential (mass) and others non-essential (attractive to jackdaws). It's a fair question, but is this the strongest objection to essentialism?