Abstract
Kittle's recent paper brings into focus two interesting aspects of dispositions and employs them in an attempt to distinguish between cases where dispositions are subject to intrinsic interferers and cases where not. But I will argue below that Kittle doesn't succeed in this attempt. The upshot is that no such distinction is in sight, and this continues to be a troubling problem for those philosophers who uphold the possibility of intrinsic interferers with dispositions by insisting that, whilst some dispositions aren't subject to intrinsic interferers, others are.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 845-854 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | Philosophical Quarterly |
Volume | 67 |
Issue number | 269 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2017 |
Keywords
- Dispositions
- Intrinsic interferers
- Opposing dispositions
- Probabilistic dispositions