A New Argument for the Incompatibility of Hylomorphism and Metaphysical Naturalism
Within the substance ontology literature in recent analytic metaphysics, four principal theories are in competition: substratum theory, bundle theory, primitive substance theory, and hylomorphism. This paper is part of a larger project attempting to show that each of these four theories is incompati...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
[publisher not identified]
[2015]
|
| In: |
Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association
Year: 2015, Volume: 89, Pages: 119-130 |
| RelBib Classification: | VA Philosophy |
| Further subjects: | B
Hylomorphism
B Ontology B Realism B Metaphysics B Naturalism |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1578190746 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20180802105907.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 180802s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.5840/acpaproc20171357 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1578190746 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-576)508190746 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BSZ508190746 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)103546733X |0 (DE-627)749540737 |0 (DE-576)382065921 |4 aut |a Dumsday, Travis | |
| 109 | |a Dumsday, Travis | ||
| 245 | 1 | 2 | |a A New Argument for the Incompatibility of Hylomorphism and Metaphysical Naturalism |c Travis Dumsday |
| 264 | 1 | |c [2015] | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Within the substance ontology literature in recent analytic metaphysics, four principal theories are in competition: substratum theory, bundle theory, primitive substance theory, and hylomorphism. This paper is part of a larger project attempting to show that each of these four theories is incompatible with metaphysical naturalism (which of course creates a problem for that view, if indeed these four theories are the only potentially workable options). To that end, I explicate and defend the following argument: Premise 1: Prime matter either can exist on its own (unactualized by substantial form) or it cannot. Premise 2: If prime matter can exist on its own (unactualized by substantial form) then metaphysical naturalism is false. Premise 3: If prime matter cannot exist on its own (unactualized by substantial form) then metaphysical naturalism is false. Conclusion; Therefore, either way, metaphysical naturalism is false. | ||
| 601 | |a Argumentation | ||
| 601 | |a Metaphysik | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Hylomorphism | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Metaphysics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Naturalism | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Ontology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Realism | |
| 652 | |a VA | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |a American Catholic Philosophical Association |t Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association |d Washington, DC : [Verlag nicht ermittelbar], 1926 |g 89(2015), Seite 119-130 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)376274395 |w (DE-600)2130243-1 |w (DE-576)443083517 |x 2153-7925 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:89 |g year:2015 |g pages:119-130 |
| 856 | |u https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc20171357 |x doi |3 Volltext | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 3020082943 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1578190746 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20180830110348 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 180802||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixzo | ||
| LOK | |0 936ln |0 1442053844 |a VA | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
| REL | |a 1 | ||
| SUB | |a REL | ||