Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:13:52.445Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are Stellar Kinds Natural Kinds? A Challenging Newcomer in the Monism/Pluralism and Realism/Antirealism Debates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Stéphanie Ruphy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Stars are remarkably absent from reflections on natural kinds and classifications, with gold, tiger, jade, and water getting all the philosophical attention. It is a pity, for interesting philosophical lessons can be drawn from stellar taxonomy as regards two central debates about natural kinds, to wit, the monism/pluralism debate and the realism/antirealism debate. I show in particular that stellar kinds will not please the essentialist monist, nor will it please the pluralist embracing promiscuous realism à la Dupré. I conclude on a more general note by questioning the relationship between taxonomic scientific practice and philosophical doctrines of natural kinds.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 77 , Issue 5 , December 2010 , pp. 1109 - 1120
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

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

‡

I would like to thank two astrophysicists, Nicolas Epchtein and Michèle Gerbaldi, for lively discussions on the science of stellar taxonomy. Needless to say, they cannot be blamed for the residuum of error this article may contain. I am also indebted to Matthew H. Slater for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.

References

Boyd, Richard. 1999. “Homeostasis, Species and Higher Taxa.” In Species: New Interdisciplinary Essays, ed. Wilson, Robert A., 141–85. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cournot, Antoine-Augustin. 1851/1975. Essai sur les fondements de nos connaissances et sur les caractères de la critique philosophique. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
Darwin, Charles. 1859/1962. On the Origin of Species. New York: Collier.Google Scholar
De Sousa, Ronald. 1984. “The Natural Shiftiness of Natural Kinds.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 14 (4): 561–80.10.1080/00455091.1984.10716397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupré, John. 1981. “Natural Kinds and Biological Taxa.” Philosophical Review 1:66–90.10.2307/2184373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupré, John. 1993. The Disorder of Things. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dupré, John. 2002. “Is ‘Natural Kind' a Natural Kind Term?” Monist 85:29–49.Google Scholar
Ellis, Brian. 1996. “Natural Kinds and Natural Kind Reasoning.” In Natural Kinds, Laws of Nature and Scientific Methodology, ed. Riggs, P. J., 11–28. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-015-8607-8_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, Brian. 2002. The Philosophy of Nature: A Guide to the New Essentialism. Chesham: Acumen.10.1017/UPO9781844653416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E. 2004. “Emotions as Natural and Normative Kinds.” Philosophy of Science 71:901–11.10.1086/425944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, Robin F. 2006. “Elements, Compounds, and Other Chemical Kinds.” Philosophy of Science 73:864–75.10.1086/518745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaschek, Carlos, and Jaschek, Mercedes. 1990. The Classification of Stars. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip. 2001. Science, Truth, and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0195145836.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kripke, Saul. 1972. “Naming and Necessity.” In Semantics of Natural Language, ed. Davidson, D. and Harman, G.. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
LaPorte, Joseph. 2004. Natural Kinds and Conceptual Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary. 1975. “The Meaning of ‘Meaning.'” In Philosophical Papers, Vol. 2, Mind, Language, and Reality, ed. Putnam, Hilary, 215–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Slater, Matthew H. 2005. “Monism on the One Hand, Pluralism on the Other.” Philosophy of Science 72:22–42.10.1086/426847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkerson, T. E. 1993. “Species, Essences and the Names of Natural Kinds.” Philosophical Quarterly 43:1–19.10.2307/2219938CrossRefGoogle Scholar