Original scientific paper

https://doi.org/10.31820/ejap.14.2.2

Is Hobbes Really an Antirealist about Accidents?

Sahar Joakim ; Saint Louis University
C. P. Ragland ; Saint Louis University

Abstract

In Metaphysical Themes, Robert Pasnau interprets Thomas Hobbes as an anti-realist about all accidents in general. In opposition to Pasnau, we argue that Hobbes is a realist about some accidents (e.g., motion and magnitude). Section One presents Pasnau’s position on Hobbes; namely, that Hobbes is an unqualified anti-realist of the eliminativist sort. Section Two offers reasons to reject Pasnau’s interpretation. Hobbes explains that magnitude is mind-independent, and he offers an account of perception in terms of motion (understood as a mind-independent feature of body). Therefore, it seems incorrect to call Hobbes an anti-realist about all accidents. Section Three considers Pasnau’s hypothetical response: he might claim that for Hobbes, motion reduces to body and does not exist in its own right. Section Four notes that reductionism about all accidents does not entail anti-realism about all accidents. Even granting Pasnau’s anticipated response, his anti-realist reading does not follow. Contra Pasnau, Hobbes is best understood as claiming that motion and magnitude exist mind-independently.

Keywords

Hobbes; Pasnau; antirealism about accidents; body; motion

Hrčak ID:

212788

URI

https://hrcak.srce.hr/212788

Publication date:

7.11.2018.

Visits: 2.015 *