id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentences	flesch	summary	cache	txt
work_jfhxg3atkrbjhbpov3j7ycicwy	R. Cooper	Why Hacking is Wrong about Human Kinds	2004	17	.pdf	application/pdf	6362	391	63	Hacking's central claim is that human kinds and natural kinds are fundamentally distinct Hacking's argument that human kinds cannot be natural kinds rests on the claim that The feedback that Hacking claims makes human kinds so very essentialist account of natural kinds is adopted then it is a serious possibility that human will consider biological species and chemical elements to be paradigmatic examples of natural kinds. Hacking argues that our classificatory practices can affect human kinds in ways that they J. Bogen ([1988]) has interpreted Hacking as claiming that human kinds are not natural kinds affects natural kinds (see, for example, Hacking [1992], p.190). Hacking has shown that human kinds are idea-dependent. description' in his argument that feedback occurs in human kinds: Hacking's argument fails and he has not shown that human kinds are not natural kinds. claim in this paper is that Hacking has failed to show that human kinds are not natural kinds.	./cache/work_jfhxg3atkrbjhbpov3j7ycicwy.pdf	./txt/work_jfhxg3atkrbjhbpov3j7ycicwy.txt