"Wholly Useless and Unserviceable to Knowledge"

Locke Studies Pub Date : 2023-04-29 DOI:10.5206/ls.2023.8331
David Wörner
{"title":"\"Wholly Useless and Unserviceable to Knowledge\"","authors":"David Wörner","doi":"10.5206/ls.2023.8331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper I examine Locke’s criticism of the view that some species of natural objects are determined by real essences, a view I call species realism. Most commentators have focused either on Locke’s putative objections to the realist’s claim that species determining real essences exist or on his semantic case against the assumption that our species terms can refer to real essences that determine species. I identify another objection, which, I argue, is independent from both of these lines of criticism. This objection is essentially practical. It is based on the claim that adopting species realism has detrimental practical consequences: it undermines, Locke believes, our ability to sort particular natural objects into species. This alone, he argues, is already sufficient to set aside and ignore species realism when trying to sort objects into species.","PeriodicalId":165811,"journal":{"name":"Locke Studies","volume":"520 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Locke Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5206/ls.2023.8331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper I examine Locke’s criticism of the view that some species of natural objects are determined by real essences, a view I call species realism. Most commentators have focused either on Locke’s putative objections to the realist’s claim that species determining real essences exist or on his semantic case against the assumption that our species terms can refer to real essences that determine species. I identify another objection, which, I argue, is independent from both of these lines of criticism. This objection is essentially practical. It is based on the claim that adopting species realism has detrimental practical consequences: it undermines, Locke believes, our ability to sort particular natural objects into species. This alone, he argues, is already sufficient to set aside and ignore species realism when trying to sort objects into species.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“对知识毫无用处,毫无用处”
在这篇论文中,我考察了洛克对自然物的某些种类是由真实本质决定的观点的批评,我称之为物种实在论。大多数评论家要么把注意力集中在洛克对现实主义关于物种决定真实本质的主张的反对上,要么集中在他的语义上反对我们的物种术语可以指决定物种的真实本质的假设上。我提出了另一种反对意见,我认为它独立于这两种批评。这种反对意见基本上是实际的。它基于这样一种说法,即采用物种现实主义会产生有害的实际后果:洛克认为,它削弱了我们将特定的自然物体分类为物种的能力。他认为,仅凭这一点,就足以在试图将物体分类为物种时搁置并忽略物种现实主义。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Review of Locke on Persons and Personal Identity by Ruth Boeker Locke on Prerogative Sameness, Persons, and the Resurrection "Wholly Useless and Unserviceable to Knowledge" Locke, Active Power, and a Puzzle about Ascription
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1