Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
5130417 | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A | 2017 | 10 Pages |
â¢The dispute about whether we discovered that Pluto is a planet is discussed.â¢This dispute is compared to the controversy about the status of the platypus.â¢Classificatory norms play a significant role in disagreement about classification.â¢Classificatory norms have important implications for controversies about pluralism.
Many astronomers seem to believe that we have discovered that Pluto is not a planet. I contest this assessment. Recent discoveries of trans-Neptunian Pluto-sized objects do not militate for Pluto's expulsion from the planets unless we have prior reason for not simply counting these newly-discovered objects among the planets. I argue that this classificatory controversy - which I compare to the controversy about the classification of the platypus - illustrates how our classificatory practices are laden with normative commitments of a distinctive kind. I conclude with a discussion of the relevance of such “norm-ladenness” to other controversies in the metaphysics of classification, such as the monism/pluralism debate.