Reply to Timothy Williamson

Timothy Williamson’s is a fascinating and challenging paper and I am afraid that in my short response I cannot do full justice to much of what he says. What I would like to do is to deal with four central issues raised by his paper. The first concerns the question of how to characterize the two theses that he finds in ‘Essence and Modality’ (henceforth referred to as E&M); the second is whether or how the use of functional expressions might lead us into mistakenly accepting certain essentialist judgements; the third is whether the error he finds in these cases might extend to the kinds of case considered in E&M; and the fourth is whether, on the basis of essentialist considerations, philosophers have reacted with undue haste in rejecting the intensional paradigm.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Metaphysics
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5334/met.209
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Philosophy and History of Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
18.02
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reply to Timothy Williamson

Kit Fine
1 citations
Metaphysics
Philosophy and History of Science
18.02
article

Reply to Timothy Williamson

Kit Fine
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Timothy Williamson’s is a fascinating and challenging paper and I am afraid that in my short response I cannot do full justice to much of what he says. What I would like to do is to deal with four central issues raised by his paper. The first concerns the question of how to characterize the two theses that he finds in ‘Essence and Modality’ (henceforth referred to as E&M); the second is whether or how the use of functional expressions might lead us into mistakenly accepting certain essentialist judgements; the third is whether the error he finds in these cases might extend to the kinds of case considered in E&M; and the fourth is whether, on the basis of essentialist considerations, philosophers have reacted with undue haste in rejecting the intensional paradigm.

MetaphysicsVol. 8(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Philosophy and History of Science
18.02
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.