Are dispositions ultimate? Reply to Franklin

Philosophical Quarterly 38 (150):84-86 (1988)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is argued that it is possible that all properties are categorical, contrary to the arguments of Franklin that there must be dispositionality "all the way down". The tasks for which dispositionality is alleged to be needed can be fulfilled by laws of nature, which are categorical relations between universals.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,197

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
417 (#48,145)

6 months
22 (#124,042)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Reply to Armstrong on dispositions.James Franklin - 1988 - Philosophical Quarterly 38 (150):86-87.
Are dispositions ultimate-reply.J. Franklin - 1988 - Philosophical Quarterly 38 (150):86-87.
Dispositions and Ontology.Denny Bradshaw - 2003 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 41 (2):169-182.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Are dispositions reducible to categorical properties?James Franklin - 1986 - Philosophical Quarterly 36 (142):62-64.

Add more references