Natural Kinds and Natural Kind Reasoning

  • Brian Ellis
Part of the Australasian Studies in History and Philosophy of Science book series (AUST, volume 12)


It is at least plausible to suppose the world consists fundamenatally of natural kinds of substances, properties and processes. But whether this is so or not, it is certainly the case that a great deal of scientific research is devoted to their study. Most chemical research, for example, is concerned with the study of natural kinds of substances and processes, and with the attempt to discover their essential natures. Much of fundamental physics is about natural kinds of particles or fields, the kinds of properties they display, and the kinds of processes in which they may be involved. Even in biology, there are fundamental kinds of structures and processes which deserve the name ‘natural kinds’. It is important, therefore, to develop a theory of natural kinds adequate to reflect these concerns, to investigate the logic of natural kinds, and to elaborate a theory of natural kind reasoning. This essay attempts to make a start on this project.


Natural Kind Essential Property Causal Power Natural Property Property Class 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Armstrong, D.M. (1978): Universals and Scientific Realism (2 vols). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Armstrong, D.M. (1989): Universals: An Opinionated Introduction. Boulder, San Francisco, London; Westview Press.Google Scholar
  3. Butts, R. E. (1977): ‘Consilience of Inductions and the Problem of Conceptual Change in Science’ in Colodny, R. G. (ed), Logic, Laws and Life. Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 71–88.Google Scholar
  4. Ellis, B. D. and Lierse, C. (1994): ‘Dispositional Essentialism’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 72, pp 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ellis, B. D. and Lierse, C. (forthcoming): ‘The Fundamental Importance of Natural Kinds’. Paper read to Australasian Association of Philosophy Conference, Adelaide, July, 1993. Available as Victorian Centre for the History and Philosophy of Science Preprint, 3/1994. Google Scholar
  6. Forster, M. R. (1988): ‘Unification, Explanation and the Composition of Causes in Newtonian Mechanics’, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 19, pp. 55–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Harper, W. (1989): ‘Consilience and Natural Kind Reasoning’, in J. R. Brown and J. Mittelstrass (eds), An Intimate Relation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 115–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kim, J. (1982): ‘Psychological Supervenience’, Philosophical Studies 41, pp. 51–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lavoisier, A. (1949): Elements of Chemistry, Book 1. Chicago, Illinois, Henry Regnery Company, Publishers for the Great Books Foundation.Google Scholar
  10. Lewis, D. K. (1983): ‘Extrinsic Properties’, Philosophical Studies 44, pp. 197–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Macnamara, J (1991): ‘Understanding Induction’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 42, pp 21–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Reichenbach, H. (1927): Philosophie der Raum-Zeit Lehre, tr. by M. Reichenbach and J. Freund as The Philosophy of Space and Time (1958). New York, Dover.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Ellis
    • 1
  1. 1.La Trobe UniversityBundooraAustralia

Personalised recommendations