In Defense of Platonic Essentialism About Numbers
In defense of anti-essentialism, pragmatist Richard Rorty holds that we may think of all objects as if they were numbers. I find that Rorty’s metaphysics hinges on two rather weak arguments against the essences of numbers. In contrast, Plato’s metaphysics offers a plausible definition of essentiality by which numbers do have essential properties. Further, I argue that Rorty’s argumentative mistake is mischaracterizing Plato’s definition. I conclude that Plato’s definition of “essential” is a robust one which implies that many properties, beyond those we might intuitively think of, can count as essential properties of objects.
Copyright (c) 2021 Megan Wu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Stance requires right of first publication. All other rights reside with the author. Authors are free to reuse their own articles in other publications they write or edit, and no further permission is required. The journal only requires acknowledgement of the original publication in Stance.
All articles are licensed with a Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial No-Derivatives 4.0 International license.