Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T11:30:47.369Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Puzzle for Social Essences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2021

MICHAEL J. RAVEN Open the ORCID record for MICHAEL J. RAVEN [Opens in a new window]
MICHAEL J. RAVEN*
Affiliation:
UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA; UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON mike@raven.site
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The social world contains institutions (nations, clubs), groups (races, genders), objects (talismans, borders), and more. This essay explores a puzzle about the essences of social items. There is widespread consensus against social essences because of problematic presuppositions often made about them. But it is argued that essence can be freed from these presuppositions and their problems. Even so, a puzzle still arises. In a Platonic spirit, essences in general seem detached from the world. In an Aristotelian spirit, social essences in particular seem embedded in the world. The puzzle is that these inclinations are individually plausible but jointly incompatible. The essay has four aims: to clarify and refine the puzzle; to explore the puzzle's implications for essence in general and for social essences in particular; to illustrate the fruitfulness of the general distinction between detached and embedded; and to develop this distinction to sketch a novel solution to the puzzle.

Keywords

social metaphysicsessenceground
Type
Article
Information
Journal of the American Philosophical Association , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , Spring 2022 , pp. 128 - 148
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Philosophical Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Thanks to audiences at the 2020 Social Metaphysics Workshop, the 2018 Social Ontology Conference, the 2015 Metaphysics Workshop ‘Artifacts and Metaphysical Explanation’, LOGOS (University of Barcelona), Union College, University of Victoria, and University of Washington, and to Matthew Andler, Kit Fine, Anthony Fisher, Martin Glazier, Aaron Griffith, Eric Hochstein, Katharine Jenkins, Kathrin Koslicki, Colin Marshall, Rebecca Mason, Conor Mayo-Wilson, Asya Passinsky, Dee Payton, Kevin Richardson, Cliff Roberts, Alex Skiles, Katie Stockdale, and anonymous referees and editors for their advice. Research for this essay was supported by a Social Science and Humanities Research Council Insight Grant for ‘The Essence of Anti-Essentialism’ (with Kathrin Koslicki), the Canadian Metaphysics Collaborative, and a University of Victoria Humanities Faculty Fellowship.

References

Alexander, Heather, and Simon, Jonathan. (2014a) ‘Sinking into Statelessness’. Tilburg Law Review, 19, 20–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, Heather, and Simon, Jonathan. (2014b) ‘“Unable to Return” in the 1951 Refugee Convention: Stateless Refugees and Climate Change’. Florida Journal of International Law, 26, 531–74.Google Scholar
Alexander, Heather, and Simon, Jonathan. (2017) ‘No Port, No Passport: Why Submerged States Can Have No Nationals’. Washington International Law Journal, 26, 307–23.Google Scholar
Almog, Joseph. (2010) ‘Nature without Essence’. Journal of Philosophy, 107, 360–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ásta, . (2008) ‘Essentiality Conferred'. Philosophical Studies, 140, 135–48. (Published under Ásta Sveinsdóttir.)Google Scholar
Barnes, Elizabeth. (2014) ‘Going beyond the Fundamental: Feminism in Contemporary Metaphysics’. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, n.s. 114, 335–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, Judith. (1988) ‘Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory’. Theater Journal, 40, 519–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornell, Drucilla. (1993) Transformations: Recollective Imagination and Sexual Difference. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Crawford, James. (2006) The Creation of States in International Law. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, Shamik. (2016) ‘Metaphysical Rationalism’. Noûs, 50, 379–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Beauvoir, Simone. (1984) The Second Sex. Translated by Pashley, H. M.. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Dupré, John. (1993) The Disorder of Things: Metaphysical Foundations of the Disunity of Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Brian. (2015) The Ant Trap: Rebuilding the Foundations of the Social Sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, Kit. (1994) ‘Essence and Modality’. Philosophical Perspectives, 8, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, Kit. (2005) ‘Necessity and Non-existence’. In Fine, Modality and Tense: Philosophical Papers (Oxford: Clarendon Press), 321–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, Kit. (2021) ‘Truthmaking and the Is-Ought Gap’. Synthese, 198, 887–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glazier, Martin. (2017) ‘Essentialist Explanation’. Philosophical Studies, 174, 2871–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslanger, Sally. (2012) ‘Gender and Race: (What) Are They? (What) Do We Want Them to Be?’ In Haslanger, Resisting Reality: Social Construction and Social Critique (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 221–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslanger, Sally. (2014) ‘Individualism, Interpretation, and Injustice: A Reply to Stahl, Betti and Mikkola’. Krisis, 1, 24–38.Google Scholar
Heyes, Cressida J. (1997) ‘Anti-essentialism in Practice: Carol Gilligan and Feminist Philosophy’. Hypatia, 12, 142–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inman, Ross. (2014) ‘Neo-Aristotelian Plenitude’. Philosophical Studies, 168, 583–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, Katharine. (2016) ‘Amelioration and Inclusion: Gender Identity and the Concept of Woman’. Ethics, 126, 394–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, Sarah-Jane. (2011) ‘Essence, Plenitude, and Paradox’. Philosophical Perspectives, 25, 277–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorde, Audre. (1984) Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. Freedom: Crossing Press.Google Scholar
Mason, Rebecca. (2016) ‘The Metaphysics of Social Kinds’. Philosophy Compass, 11, 841–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, Rebecca. (2021) ‘Social Kinds Are Essentially Mind-Dependent’. Philosophical Studies. Published ahead of print, April 19, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-021-01633-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, Kathleen. (2019). ‘A Big Moment Finally Comes for the Little Shell: Federal Recognition of Their Tribe.’ Washington Post, December 21, 2019.Google Scholar
Mikkola, Mari. (2015) ‘Doing Ontology and Doing Justice: What Feminist Philosophy Can Teach Us about Meta-Metaphysics’. Inquiry, 58, 780–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nanay, Bence. (2010) ‘Three Ways of Resisting Racism’. Monist, 93, 255–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passinsky, Asya. (2019) ‘Finean Feminist Metaphysics’. Inquiry. Published ahead of print, September 30, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2019.1669984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passinsky, Asya. (2020) ‘Social Objects, Response-Dependence, and Realism’. Journal of the American Philosophical Association, 6, 431–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passinsky, Asya. (2021) ‘Social Kind Essentialism’. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Quine, Willard van Orman. (1976) ‘Three Grades of Modal Involvement’. In Quine, The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), 158–76.Google Scholar
Raven, Michael J. (2015) ‘Ground’. Philosophy Compass, 10, 322–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raven, Michael J. (2017) ‘New Work for a Theory of Ground’. Inquiry, 60, 625–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raven, Michael J. (2020a) ‘Is Logic Out of this World?’. Journal of Philosophy, 117, 557–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raven, Michael J., ed. (2020b) The Routledge Handbook of Metaphysical Grounding. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raven, Michael J. (2021a) ‘The Bases of Truths’. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Raven, Michael J. (2021b) ‘Explaining Essences’. Philosophical Studies, 178, 1043–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, Katherine. (2015) ‘The Metaphysics of Social Groups’. Philosophy Compass, 10, 310–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, Jonathan. (2017) ‘Social Construction as Grounding; or: Fundamentality for Feminists, a Reply to Barnes and Mikkola’. Philosophical Studies, 174, 2449–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schor, Naomi, and Weed, Elizabeth, eds. (1994) The Essential Difference. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Searle, John R. (1995) The Construction of Social Reality. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Sider, Theodore. (2017) ‘Substantivity in Feminist Metaphysics’. Philosophical Studies, 174, 2467–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Barry. (2001) ‘Fiat Objects’. Topoi, 20, 131–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Barry, and Varzi, Achille C.. (2000) ‘Fiat and Bona Fide Boundaries’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 60, 401–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spelman, Elizabeth V. (1988) Inessential Woman: Problems of Exclusion in Feminist Thought. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Meghan. (2017) ‘Are there Essential Properties? No’. In Barnes, Elizabeth (ed.), Current Controversies in Metaphysics (New York: Routledge), 45–61.Google Scholar
Thomasson, Amie L. (2003a) ‘Foundations for a Social Ontology’. ProtoSociology, 18/19, 269–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomasson, Amie L. (2003b) ‘Realism and Human Kinds’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 67, 580–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Robert A., Barker, Matthew J., and Brigandt, Ingo. (2007) ‘When Traditional Essentialism Fails: Biological Natural Kinds’. Philosophical Topics, 35, 189–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witt, Charlotte. (1995) ‘Anti-essentialism and Feminist Theory’. Philosophical Topics, 23, 321–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witt, Charlotte. (2011) The Metaphysics of Gender. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yablo, Stephen. (1987) ‘Identity, Essence, and Indiscernibility’. Journal of Philosophy, 84, 293–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar