How to analyse substance: A reply to Schnieder

Ratio 20 (1):130–141 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In a recent issue of this journal, Benjamin Schnieder has presented an objection to the account of individual substance that we have developed and put to various uses in our works on metaphysics. According to Schnieder's objection, our proposal to analyse this notion of substantiality suffers from a special kind of circularity. In this paper, we give two replies to Schnieder's objection. The first is that a successful analysis is not, in fact, required to avoid the sort of circularity about which Schnieder complains. The second is that our analysis does not involve the alleged circularity.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,853

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
54 (#295,612)

6 months
6 (#520,848)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Gary Rosenkrantz
University of North Carolina, Greensboro

Citations of this work

Independence accounts of substance and substantial parts.Patrick Toner - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 155 (1):37 - 43.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references