Abstract
Is everything about reality either qualitative or somehow determined by the qualitative character of reality itself? Metaphysical anti-Haecceitism is often taken to be the claim that this is the case, and to entail that reality is fundamentally qualitative. In this paper, I (1) argue against the idea that metaphysical anti-Haecceitism should be characterized in such terms, and (2) defend a novel way to phrase such a view. This will be done by taking the main arguments for anti-Haecceitism as a guide and by singling out the proper commitments of a view that satisfies the desideratum set forth by such arguments. The phrasing I shall offer will help tell the issue of anti-Haecceitism apart from some concerns about fundamentality that, I will contend, are orthogonal to it—among them, the question whether there is fundamentality at all.
Highlights
Must There Be Fundamentality for the Issue to Arise?Contra Adams’s question and the approach inaugurated by Dasgupta—at least when taken at face value—the characterizations I suggest we consider do not make any appeal to facts
This paper deals with the disagreement between metaphysical Haecceitism and metaphysical anti-Haecceitism
Metaphysical anti-Haecceitism might be thought as the claim that the former is the case—i.e., that reality is “constituted by purely qualitative facts”
Summary
Contra Adams’s question and the approach inaugurated by Dasgupta—at least when taken at face value—the characterizations I suggest we consider do not make any appeal to facts They do not assume that for reality to be fundamentally so-and-so is for it to be constituted by facts that are so-and-so and perhaps by other facts all of which are determined by some so-and-so ones. The tentative characterizations I am considering qualify every view that denies there to be a fundamental level of reality as a form of Haecceitism. Deny there to be a fundamental level—that the phrasings I am considering are wrong-headed
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
