A world where 'human being' picks out a non-animal natural kind (e.g., a Cartesian thinking substance without animality) is conceivable, placing the inference in the category of a posteriori necessity rather than strict logical compulsion.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Animality(given as an example of a form that relates to the particular substance 'animals'): The essential quality or nature of being an animal—the core features that make something count as an animal rather than a plant or object.
Cartesian: # Cartesian "Cartesian" refers to a system of organizing space using perpendicular lines or axes (usually labeled x, y, and z) that intersect at a point called the origin, allowing you to pinpoint any location using numbers called coordinates. The term comes from René Descartes, a 17th-century French philosopher and mathematician who developed this method as a way to bridge geometry and algebra. You use it every day without thinking about it—GPS coordinates, video game graphics, and even spreadsheet cells all rely on this Cartesian coordinate system.
a posteriori necessity(Proposed interpretation of Aristotle's philosophy of science): Necessity discovered through experience rather than derived from pure reason alone
a priori(Frege treats 'analytic' as entailing 'a priori' for arithmetic.)

Based on where you are in your exploration