Kant and Natural Kind Terms

Citation data:

THEORIA. An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science, ISSN: 0495-4548, Vol: 31, Issue: 1, Page: 55-72

Publication Year:
2016
Usage 732
Abstract Views 371
HTML Views 299
Downloads 56
Link-outs 6
Captures 15
Exports-Saves 15
Readers 0
Social Media 2
Tweets 2
Repository URL:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/12172
DOI:
10.1387/theoria.14436
Author(s):
Luca Forgione
Publisher(s):
UPV/EHU Press, Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea / Universidad del PaĆ­s Vasco
Tags:
Arts and Humanities
Most Recent Tweet View All Tweets
article description
As is well known, the linguistic/philosophical reflection on natural kind terms has undergone a remarkable development in the early seventies with Putnam and Kripke's essentialist approaches, touching upon different aspects (metaphysical and epistemological in particular) of Kant's slant. Preliminarily, however, it might be useful to review some of the theoretical stages in Locke and Leibniz's approaches on natural kind terms in the light of contemporary reflections, to eventually pinpoint Kant's contribution and see how some commentators have placed it within the theory of direct reference. Starting with textual evidence even from the logical corpus, in the present essay I will attempt to discuss some of the arguments dismissing Kant's adherence to this view. These assume that in his approach to the semantics of natural kind terms, Kant appears to be still holding on to a nominalist/conceptualist position, though he seems to be well aware of a few key issues for the theorists of direct reference.

This article has 0 Wikipedia mention.