Abstract

Aristotle's essentialism distinguishes between what belongs in itself and what belongs accidentally. Yet two distinct kinds of entity belong in itself: those that belong to something in what it is, and those that have what they belong to in the account of what they are; it is not clear in what sense the latter are essential. I articulate the nature of these entities, and argue that they are indeed essential in that they cannot not belong to their subjects. This is because they are 'entrenched' within the generic matter that is 'worked up' into the substance that is their subject.

pdf

Share