How to be a postmodal directionalist.

According to directionalism, non-symmetric relations are distinct from their converses. Kit Fine (2000a) argues that the directionalist faces a dilemma; they must either (i) reject the principle Uniqueness, which states that no completion (fact, state of affairs, or proposition) is a completion of m...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophical Studies Vol. 183; no. 9; pp. 2773 - 2804
Autor principal: Dixon, Scott
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Sep2026
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=196666771&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 196666771
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318116
        4L8
      jtl: Philosophical Studies
      issn: 00318116
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Sep2026
      vid: 183
      iid: 9
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        196666771
        10.1007/s11098-024-02237-0
      ppf: 2773
      ppct: 31
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 1.4MB
      tig:
        atl: How to be a postmodal directionalist.
      aug:
        au: Dixon, Scott
        affil: https://ror.org/005w9jb47 Department of Philosophy, Lawrence University, 711 E. Boldt Way, 54911, Appleton, WI, USA
      sug:
      keyword:
        Completions
        Converses
        Directionalism
        Hyperintensionality
        Relations
      ab: According to directionalism, non-symmetric relations are distinct from their converses. Kit Fine (2000a) argues that the directionalist faces a dilemma; they must either (i) reject the principle Uniqueness, which states that no completion (fact, state of affairs, or proposition) is a completion of more than one relation, or (ii) reject the principle Identity, which states that each completion of a relation is identical to a completion of its converse (e.g., Dante's loving Bice is identical to Bice's being loved by Dante). Fine's argument has been regarded as a decisive blow to directionalism. But new strategies for replying to it can be developed with the tools of the postmodal metaphysician, who is comfortable individuating relations and their completions hyperintensionally, allowing for necessary connections between distinct entities, and making use of hyperintensional notions like essence and grounding. In what follows, I develop postmodal strategies for denying both horns of Fine's dilemma, concluding that the postmodal directionalist need not be concerned with Fine's argument.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Philosophical Studies is a copyright of Springer, 2026. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Philosophical Studies
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2026
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N