Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:14:28.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Metaphysical Constraints, Primitivism, and Reduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2019

MICHAEL BERTRAND Open the ORCID record for MICHAEL BERTRAND [Opens in a new window]
MICHAEL BERTRAND*
Affiliation:
AUBURN UNIVERSITYMdb0068@auburn.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The argument from absence of analysis (AAA) infers primitivism about some x from the absence of a reductive analysis of x. But philosophers use the word ‘primitive’ to mean many distinct things. I argue that there is a robust sense of ‘primitive’ present in the metaphysics literature that cannot be inferred via the AAA. Successfully demonstrating robust primitivism about some x requires showing two things at once: that a reduction of x is not possible and that an explanatorily deep characterization of x is not available. In order to secure this second explanatory claim, the AAA must wrongly assume that reductive analysis is our only source of explanatory characterization. I argue that this is false by offering a distinct way of providing explanatory characterizations backed by suitably understood metaphysical constraints. While there remains a minimal sense of ‘primitive’ inferable via the AAA, this sense is exhausted by the denial of reduction. With minimal primitivism as its target, the AAA is uninteresting.

Keywords

reductionexplanationessenceprimitivepersonal identity
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the American Philosophical Association , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , Winter 2019 , pp. 503 - 521
Copyright
Copyright © American Philosophical Association 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

For helpful discussion and advice, thanks to audiences at the Auburn Philosophical Society and the Work in Progress series at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. I am particularly thankful to LA Paul, Marc Lange, Thomas Hofweber, Robert Smithson, Finnur Dellsen, Scott Hill, Michael Watkins, and several anonymous referees. Special thanks to Ram Neta for the interesting conversation that originated this paper.

References

Bennett, Karen. (2011) ‘Construction Area (No Hard Hat Required)’. Philosophical Studies, 154, 79–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, Karen. (2017) Making Things Up. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertrand, Michael. (2017) ‘Fundamental Ontological Structure: An Argument Against Pluralism’. Philosophical Studies, 174, 1277–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertrand, Michael. (Forthcoming) ‘Metaphysical Explanation by Constraint’. Erkenntnis, 1–16.Google Scholar
Byrne, Alex, and Hilbert, David R.. (2007) ‘Color Primitivism’. Erkenntnis, 66, 73–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, David. (1996) The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chalmers, David, and Jackson, Frank. (2001) ‘Conceptual Analysis and Reductive Explanation’. The Philosophical Review, 110, 315–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasgupta, Shamik. (2017) ‘Constitutive Explanation’. Philosophical Issues, 27, 74–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elgin, Samuel Z. (Forthcoming) ‘Merely Partial Definition and the Analysis of Knowledge’. Synthese, 1–25.Google Scholar
Elgin, Samuel Z. (2018) ‘There Are No Metaphysical Primitives’. https://samuelelgin.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/there-are-no-metaphysical-primitives.pdf.Google Scholar
Fine, Kit. (1994) ‘Essence and Modality’. Philosophical Perspectives, 8, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, Kit. (2001) ‘The Question of Realism’. Philosophers’ Imprint, 1, 1–30.Google Scholar
Frankfurt, Harry. (1969) ‘Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility’. Journal of Philosophy, 66, 829–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawley, Katherine. (2006) ‘Principles of Composition and Criteria of Identity. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 84, 481–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Jeffrey. (1998) ‘What is a Philosophical Analysis?’ Philosophical Studies, 90, 155–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kment, Boris. (2014) Modality and Explanatory Reasoning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kripke, Saul. (1980) Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, David. (1983) ‘Survival and Identity’. In Lewis, Philosophical Papers, vol. 1 (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 55–73.Google Scholar
Lewis, David. (1994) ‘Humean Supervenience Debugged’. Mind, 103, 473–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipman, Martin A. (2018) ‘A Passage Theory of Time’. In Bennett, Karen and Zimmerman, Dean (eds.), Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, vol. 11 (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 95–123.Google Scholar
Lowe, E. J. (2012). ‘A Neo-Aristotelian Substance Ontology: Neither Relational nor Constituent’. In Tahko, Tuomas E. (ed.), Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 229–48.Google Scholar
Markosian, Ned. (1998) ‘Brutal Composition’. Philosophical Studies, 92, 211–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, Kris. (2017) The Fragmentation of Being. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melnyk, Andrew. (2008) Can Physicalism be Non-Reductive?’ Philosophy Compass, 3, 1281–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merricks, Trenton. (1998) ‘There Are No Criteria of Identity Over Time’. Nous, 32, 106–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, G. E. (1993) Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nagel, Ernest. (1979) The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
Ney, Alyssa. (2008) ‘Defining Physicalism’. Philosophy Compass, 3, 1033–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, Eric. (1999) The Human Animal: Personal Identity Without Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, Eric. (2016) ‘Personal identity’. In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2016 edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/identity-personal.Google Scholar
Parsons, Josh. (2001) ‘Theories of Persistence’. PhD diss., The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Rosen, Gideon. (2010) ‘Metaphysical Dependence: Grounding and Reduction’. In Hale, Bob and Hoffmann, Aviv (eds.), Modality: Metaphysics, Logic, and Epistemology (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 109–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, Gideon. (2015) ‘Real Definition’. Analytic Philosophy, 56, 189–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rota, Michael. (2009) ‘An Anti-Reductionist Account of Singular Causation’. The Monist, 92, 133–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, Jonathan. (2008) ‘Causation and Laws of Nature: Reductionism’. In Zimmerman, Dean, Hawthorne, John, and Sider, Theodore (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing), 82–107.Google Scholar
Schaffer, Jonathan. (2009) ‘On What Grounds What’. In Manley, David, Chalmers, David J., and Wasserman, Ryan (eds.), Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 347–83.Google Scholar
Schaffer, Jonathan. (2012) ‘Grounding, Transitivity, and Contrastivity’. In Correia, Fabrice and Schneider, Benjamin (eds.), Metaphysical Grounding: Understanding the Structure of Reality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 122–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, Jonathan. (2015) ‘What Not to Multiply Without Necessity’. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 93, 644–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schaffer, Jonathan. (2017) ‘The Ground Between the Gaps’. Philosopher's Imprint, 17, 1–26.Google Scholar
Sider, Theodore. (2011) Writing the Book of the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simons, Peter. (1987) Parts: A Study in Ontology. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Skiles, Alexander. (2014) ‘Primitivism about Intrinsicality’. In Francescotti, Robert (ed.), Companion to Intrinsic Properties (New York: De Gruyter), 221–52.Google Scholar
Smart, J. J. C. (1959) ‘Sensations and Brain Processes’. The Philosophical Review, 68, 141–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, Judith Jarvis. (1997) ‘People and their Bodies’. In Dancy, J. (ed.), Reading Parfit (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing), 202–29.Google Scholar
van Gulick, Robert. (2001) ‘Reduction, Emergence and Other Recent Options on the Mind/Body Problem: A Philosophic Overview’. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8, 1–34.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy. (2000) Knowledge and its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar