@article {12584,
	title = {Kripkean Essentialist Argument and Its Generalization},
	journal = {Organon F},
	volume = {25},
	number = {2},
	year = {2018},
	pages = {142-154},
	type = {State},
	abstract = {In this paper I examine the argument by H. Beebee and N. Sabbarton-Leary that Brian Ellis{\textquoteright}s scientific essentialism is based on the {\textquotedblleft}abuse{\textquotedblright} of the necessary <em>a posteriori</em>. I will first briefly survey various attempts to resist what I will call the {\textquotedblleft}Kripkean essentialist argument{\textquotedblright} to locate Beebee{\textquoteright}s and Sabbarton-Leary{\textquoteright}s position properly. After that I will argue that Beebee{\textquoteright}s and Sabbarton-Leary{\textquoteright}s argument is not successful; in particular, I will argue that under the most natural interpretation of their position it is not internally coherent, and that their argument is based on a superficial understanding of Kripkean necessity <em>a posteriori</em>.},
	keywords = {analyticity, Kripkean essentialist argument, natural kind, necessity a posteriori},
	url = {http://www.klemens.sav.sk/fiusav/doc/organon/2018/2/142-154.pdf},
	author = {Lee, Jaeho}
}
