Kant and Natural Kind Terms

IF 0.4 4区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Luca Forgione
{"title":"Kant and Natural Kind Terms","authors":"Luca Forgione","doi":"10.1387/THEORIA.14436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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 (cf. §3), 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 (cf. § 2), to eventually pinpoint Kant’s contribution and see how some commentators have placed it within the theory of direct reference (cf. §4). Starting with textual evidence even from the logical corpus (cf. §§5-6), 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 (§§7-8).","PeriodicalId":45699,"journal":{"name":"THEORIA-REVISTA DE TEORIA HISTORIA Y FUNDAMENTOS DE LA CIENCIA","volume":"31 1","pages":"55-72"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THEORIA-REVISTA DE TEORIA HISTORIA Y FUNDAMENTOS DE LA CIENCIA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1387/THEORIA.14436","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

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 (cf. §3), 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 (cf. § 2), to eventually pinpoint Kant’s contribution and see how some commentators have placed it within the theory of direct reference (cf. §4). Starting with textual evidence even from the logical corpus (cf. §§5-6), 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 (§§7-8).
康德与自然类术语
众所周知,在七十年代早期,随着普特南和克里普克的本质主义方法(参见§3),对自然类术语的语言/哲学反思经历了显著的发展,触及了康德倾向的不同方面(特别是形而上学和认识论)。然而,首先,根据当代反思(参见§2),回顾洛克和莱布尼茨关于自然类的方法的一些理论阶段,最终确定康德的贡献,并看看一些评论家如何将其置于直接参考理论中(参见§4),这可能是有用的。从逻辑语料库的文本证据开始(参见§§5-6),在本文中,我将试图讨论一些驳斥康德坚持这种观点的论点。这些假设认为,在他对自然类术语的语义的研究中,康德似乎仍然坚持唯名论/概念论的立场,尽管他似乎很清楚地意识到直接指称理论家的几个关键问题(§§7-8)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
13
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍: THEORIA is open to original and relevant papers from any of the fields covered by the journal, i.e. logic and philosophy of logic, history and philosophy of mathematics, history and philosophy of science, philosophy of technology, philosophy of language and philosophy of mind and cognition. Articles in English and Spanish are preferred, but the journal also accepts articles written in any of the languages of the Iberian Peninsula.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信