more on this theme | more from this text
Full Idea
The differences between Aristotelian essentialism and Kripke's essentialism are so fundamental and pervasive that it is a serious distortion of both views to think of essentialism as a single theory.
Gist of Idea
Aristotelian and Kripkean essentialism are very different theories
Source
Charlotte Witt (Substance and Essence in Aristotle [1989], Intro)
Book Ref
Witt,Charlotte: 'Substance and Essence in Aristotle' [Cornell 1994], p.1
A Reaction
This seems to me to be very important, because there is a glib assumption that when essentialism is needed for modal logic, that we must immediately have embraced what Aristotle was saying. Aristotle was better than Kripke.
| 12066 | Aristotelian and Kripkean essentialism are very different theories [Witt] |
| 12067 | An Aristotelian essence is a nonlinguistic correlate of the definition [Witt] |
| 12082 | If unity is a matter of degree, then essence may also be a matter of degree [Witt] |
| 12085 | Reality is directional [Witt] |
| 12089 | Essences mainly explain the existence of unified substance [Witt] |
| 12102 | Essential properties of origin are too radically individual for an Aristotelian essence [Witt] |