Why I am not a tropist
| Abstract | A major division among ontologists has always been the one between those who believe that all entities are particular, and those who believe that at least some entities are universal. I find myself with the latter, and in this paper I offer part of the reasons why this is so. More precisely, I offer a reason why we ought to reject tropism, due to the failure of this view to account for the similarities we experience among entities. In the paper, two tentative accounts are considered and rejected: one postulating the existence of a relation of primitive resemblance; the other denying the existence of any similarity. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,701 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesEugen Zeleňák (2009). On Explanatory Relata in Singular Causal Explanation. Theoria 75 (3):179-195.
Luca Moretti (2008). The Ontological Status of Minimal Entities. Philosophical Studies 141 (1):97 - 114.
Nathan Stemmer (2001). The Mind-Body Problem and Quine's Repudiation Theory. Behavior And Philosophy 29:187-202.
Nurbay Irmak (forthcoming). Software is an Abstract Artifact. Grazer Philosophische Studien.
Iris Einheuser (2009). Some Remarks on “Language-Created Entities”. Acta Analytica 24 (3):185-192.
Friederike Moltmann (2010). On the Semantics of Existence Predicates. In Ingo Reich (ed.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 15, Saarbruecken.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads46 ( #23,860 of 549,122 )Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,263 of 549,122 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
