|Natural Kinds, philosophy: deviating from the biological definition, substances such as gold, water, etc. are referred to as natural kinds in the recent philosophical discussion. This goes back to the way in which these terms were introduced. (See H. Putnam, “The Meaning of 'Meaning”'. In Philosophical Papers, Vol. 2. Mind, Language and Reality, Cambridge.) Starting from a primary showing, the natural kind is defined as "something like this". The decisive point here is that there is no limit to future research. Virtually, any property that is initially attributed can prove to be a false assumption. See also introduction, definitions, terms._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
Books on Amazon
Natural kind/Fodor: no nat. kind: E.g. - -less than- "there is no science that is based on this predicate -" E.g. -less then three kilometers from the Eiffel Tower" if I knew what a law is, I would say: - P is a nat. kind predicate relative to S if S contains actual laws of the form Px>ax or ax>Px a-A-P are the predicates whose terms are the bound variables in the actual laws of a science - "Problem: concept of law unclear".
E.g. different payment modes (sea shealls, dollar bills) form a nat. kind - "because Gresham s Law applies to payments".
Def natural kind/Fodor: Thing and event classes about which there are important generalizations - "not all physical natural kinds - complete generalization dissolves nat. kind ._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.
J. Fodor/E. Lepore
Holism Cambridge USA Oxford UK 1992