Dispositional Properties and Counterfactual Conditionals

被引:62
作者
Choi, Sungho [1 ]
机构
[1] Kyung Hee Univ, Dept Philosophy, Seoul 130701, South Korea
关键词
D O I
10.1093/mind/fzn054
中图分类号
B [哲学、宗教];
学科分类号
01 ; 0101 ;
摘要
For the last several decades, dispositional properties have been one of the main topics in metaphysics. Still, however, there is little agreement among contemporary metaphysicians on the nature of dispositional properties. Apparently, though, the majority of them have reached the consensus that dispositional ascriptions cannot be analysed in terms of simple counterfactual conditionals. In this paper it will be argued that this consensus is wrong. Specifically, I will argue that the simple conditional analysis of dispositions, which is generally thought to be dead, is in fact an adequate analysis of dispositions. I will go on to discuss Mumford's view of dispositions from the perspective of the simple conditional analysis of dispositions.
引用
收藏
页码:795 / 841
页数:47
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
Armstrong D., 1973, BELIEF TRUTH KNOWLED
[2]  
Armstrong DM, 1997, WORLD STATES AFFAIRS
[3]  
Bennett J.F., 2003, PHILOS GUIDE CONDITI
[4]   Dispositions and antidotes (Reply to David Lewis) [J].
Bird, A .
PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY, 1998, 48 (191) :227-234
[5]  
Carroll JW, 2001, PHILOS REV, V110, P82
[6]   The simple vs. reformed conditional analysis of dispositions [J].
Choi, S .
SYNTHESE, 2006, 148 (02) :369-379
[7]   Do categorical ascriptions entail counterfactual conditionals? [J].
Choi, S .
PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY, 2005, 55 (220) :495-503
[8]   Dispositions and mimickers [J].
Choi, S .
PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES, 2005, 122 (02) :183-188
[9]   Improving Bird's antidotes [J].
Choi, S .
AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY, 2003, 81 (04) :573-580
[10]  
CHOI SH, PHILOS PHEN IN PRESS