For decades, the modal account of essentialism (MAE), which equates essential properties with necessary ones, has been widely accepted. However, Kit Fine’s influential work (1994) challenged this by showing that not all necessary properties are essential. Despite many attempts to salvage MAE, no satisfactory solution has emerged. This paper aims to pinpoint the problems with current modal responses to Fine and suggest a viable path forward.

(2026). What went wrong with modal responses to fine? [journal article - articolo]. In ANALYSIS. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10446/310605

What went wrong with modal responses to fine?

Nencha, Cristina
2026-01-01

Abstract

For decades, the modal account of essentialism (MAE), which equates essential properties with necessary ones, has been widely accepted. However, Kit Fine’s influential work (1994) challenged this by showing that not all necessary properties are essential. Despite many attempts to salvage MAE, no satisfactory solution has emerged. This paper aims to pinpoint the problems with current modal responses to Fine and suggest a viable path forward.
articolo
2026
Nencha, Cristina
(2026). What went wrong with modal responses to fine? [journal article - articolo]. In ANALYSIS. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10446/310605
File allegato/i alla scheda:
File Dimensione del file Formato  
anaf044.pdf

accesso aperto

Versione: publisher's version - versione editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione del file 179.38 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
179.38 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Aisberg ©2008 Servizi bibliotecari, Università degli studi di Bergamo | Terms of use/Condizioni di utilizzo

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10446/310605
Citazioni
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact