Mauro Murzi

A Defence of Pluralism in the Debate about Natural Kinds: Case Study from the Classification of Celestial Objects

Article
12/2 - Fall 2007, pages 359–377
Date of online publication: 15 November 2007
Date of publication: 01 November 2007

Abstract

I reconsider the monism/pluralism debate about natural kinds. Monism claims that there is a privileged division of reality into natural kinds, while pluralism states that there are many ways of classifying objects according to different purposes. I compare three different monistic accounts of natural kinds with the pluralism advocated by promiscuous realism. The analysis of some examples of the classification of celestial objects suggest that there are indeed different legitimate ways of classifying things according to different purposes; contrary to monism, the boundaries between kinds are not fixed. These results show that promiscuous realism is a better account of natural kind.

Keywords

Cite this article

Murzi, Mauro. “A Defence of Pluralism in the Debate about Natural Kinds: Case Study from the Classification of Celestial Objects.” Forum Philosophicum 12, no. 2 (2007): 359–377. doi:10.5840/forphil200712211.

Bibliography

A'Hearn, Michael F. “Pluto: A Planet or a Trans-Neptunian Object?” In Highlights of Astronomy, vol. 12, edited by H. Rickman: 201–204. San Francisco, CA: Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 2001.

Boyd, Richard. “Realism, Anti-foundationalism and the Enthusiasm for Natural Kinds.” Philosophical Studies 61, no. 1 (1991): 127–148. doi:10.1007/BF00385837.

Carnap, Rudolf. Logical Foundations of Probability. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1950.

Collier, John. “On the Necessity of Natural Kinds.” In Natural Kinds, Laws of Nature and Scientific Methodology, edited by Peter J. Riggs, 1–10. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1996.

Dupré, John. The Disorder of Things: Metaphysical Foundations of the Disunity of Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993.

Dupré, John. Humans and Others Animals. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002.

Dupré, John, and A. Haddock. “Natural Kinds.” In Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 6, edited by Donald M Borchert, 503–505. New York: MacMillan Reference, 2006.

Fernie, J. D. “The Period-Luminosity Relation: A Historical Review.” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 81 (1969): 707–731.

Gribbin, John. Enciclopedia di Astronomia e Cosmologia. Edited Libero Sosio. Milano: Garzanti, 1998.

Hacking, Ian. “A Tradition of Natural Kinds.” Philosophical Studies 61, no. 1 (1991): 109–126. doi:10.1007/BF00385836.

Kennicutt Jr., Robert C. “Star Formation in Galaxies Along the Hubble Sequence.” Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 36 (1998) pp. 189–231.

Kripke, Saul A. “Identity and Necessity.” In Identity and Individuation, edited by Milton Karl Munitz, 135–164.. New York: New York University Press, 1971.

Kripke, Saul A. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980.

Machery, Edouard. “Concepts Are Not a Natural Kind.” Philosophy of Science 72, no. 3 (2005): 444–467. doi:10.1086/498473.

Marsden, Brian G. Minor Planet Electronic Circular 1999-C03: Editorial Notice. Published February 4, 1999. http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/mpec/J99/J99C03.html.

Morgan, William Wilson. “A Morphological Life.” Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 26 (1988): 1–9.

Munitz, Milton Karl, ed. Identity and Individuation. New York: New York University Press, 1971.

Putnam, Hilary. “The Meaning of ‘Meaning’.” In Mind, Language and Reality. Philosophical Papers, 2:215–271. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975.

Riess, Adam, William Press and Robert Kirshner. “A Precise Distance Indicator: Type Ia Supernova Multicolor Light Curve Shapes.” The Astrophysical Journal 473, no. 88 (1996): 88–109. doi:10.1086/178129.

Riggs, Peter J, ed. Natural Kinds, Laws of Nature and Scientific Methodology. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1996.

Sandage, Allan. “Classification and Stellar Content of Galaxies Obtained from Direct Photography.” Galaxies and the Universe, edited by Allan Sandage, Mary Sandage, and Jerome Kristian, 1–35. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975.

Sandage, Allan. “Star Formation Rates, Galaxy Morphology, and the Hubble Sequence.” Astronomy and Astrophysics 161 (1986): 89–101.

Sandage, Allan. “The Classification of Galaxies: Early History and Ongoing Developments.” Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 43 (2005): 581–624.

Sandage, Allan, Mary Sandage, and Jerome Kristian, eds. Galaxies and the Universe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975.

Slater, Matthew H. “Monism on the One Hand, Pluralism on the Other.” Philosophy of Science 72, no. 1 (2005): 22–42. doi:10.1086/426847.

Soter, Steven. “What is a Planet?” Scientific American 296, no. l (2007): 34–41.

Vaucouleurs, Gérard de. Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies. New York: Springer, 1991.

Wilson, Robert A. “Promiscuous Realism.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47, no. 2 (1996), pp. 303–316. doi:10.1093/bjps/47.2.303.

Copyright