Publication details for Dr Matthew TugbyTugby, Matthew (2012). Rescuing Dispositionalism from the Ultimate Problem: Reply to Barker and Smart. Analysis 72(4): 723-731.
- Publication type: Journal Article
- ISSN/ISBN: 0003-2638, 1467-8284
- DOI: 10.1093/analys/ans112
- Keywords: Properties, Laws, Dispositions, Qualities, Essentialism, Monism.
- Further publication details on publisher web site
- Durham Research Online (DRO) - may include full text
Author(s) from Durham
Barker and Smart have argued that dispositional monism is just as susceptible to the ultimate regress problem as Armstrong’s contingent necessitation view of laws. In this response, I consider what implications this conclusion has for the dispositional essentialist project more generally. I argue that it is the monistic aspect of dispositional monism, rather than the dispositional essentialist aspect, which is the source of the problem raised by Barker and Smart. I then outline a version of dispositional essentialism which avoids the ultimate problem by avoiding the commitment to monism. Despite the article by Barker and Smart, it is not time to give up on the dispositionalist project yet.