We were discussing Chanel No. 5, etc. -- and I was wondering. One thing is
i. The quintessential Popper
i.e. Popper (cfr. "The quintessential Hitchcock"). And another:
ii. The quintessential Popperian.
Notably, back in the early days, when Popper read Ayer and tried to
refudiate Ayer's criterion of verifiability-in-principle for a criterion of
falsifiability-in-the-end, philosophers thought he (Popper, the quintessential
Popper) was proposing a criterion of demarcation, as Ayer was, of _meaning_.
But no, Popper said his criterion was one for demarcating 'science'. Was he
being an essentialist?
He might have changed, but _essences_ as D. Hume said (he hated essences)
_remain_.
And then there's the quintessential Grice.
Cheers,
Speranza
