David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The Monist 61 (3):460-475 (1978)
Platonism, in its most recent and seemingly most cogent form, has rested on (a) the supposed indispensability of descriptive predicate terms in so-called "improved," or "clarified," or "perspicuous" languages; (b) the distinction between subject and predicate terms based on the asymmetry of the predication relation; and (c) the claimed ontological significance of the different categories of terms implied by (a) and (b). Nominalism, in one of its most pervasive recent forms, has involved the denial of the criterion of ontological commitment embedded in (c) by explicitly or implicitly adopting the criterion expressed in Quine's formula "to be is to be the value of a variable." To avoid the obvious charge that nominalists merely ignore abstract entities by the arbitrary ploy of changing the rules, i.e. denying that ontological commitments are made by the inclusion of primitive predicates in schemata of certain kinds by simply employing a different criterion of commitment, some nominalists have sought to argue for their criterion by pointing to the distinction between singular and general terms and the radically different roles such terms play. The distinction between singular and general terms becomes the premise for an argument that purportedly supports Quine's criterion of ontological commitment. This criterion, in turn, provides the basis for the nomin'alist's use of primitive predicates, as general terms, without ontological commitment to abstract entities. In this paper I shall argue that the nominalist's gambit is inadequate in that the distinction between singular and general terms, as employed by a philosopher like Quine, merely provides a way of stating the nominalist's position and does not provide a reason for holding such a position. To put it another way, if we consider the contemporary nominalist to argue from the distinction between singular and general terms to the cogency of nominalism, since the former provides a ground for Quine's criterion of ontological commitment which, in turn, provides the basis for the latter, then the line of thought is question begging. It is so in that the very way the nominalist draws the distinction presupposes a nominalistic view, since a careful statement of that distinction amounts to a restatement of the nominalistic position.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Herbert Hochberg (2013). Nominalism and Idealism. Axiomathes 23 (2):213-234.
Herbert Hochberg (1987). Russell's Early Analysis of Relational Predication and the Asymmetry of the Predication Relation. Philosophia 17 (4):439-459.
Nino Cocchiarella (2001). Logic and Ontology. Axiomathes 12 (1-2):117-150.
James van Cleve (1994). Predication Without Universals? A Fling with Ostrich Nominalism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54 (3):577-590.
James Van Cleve (1994). Predication Without Universals? A Fling with Ostrich Nominalism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54 (3):577 - 590.
Corine Besson (2010). Rigidity, Natural Kind Terms, and Metasemantics. In Helen Beebee & Nigel Sabbarton-Leary (eds.), The Semantics and Metaphysics of Natural Kinds. Routledge 25--44.
Nino Cocchiarella (1980). Nominalism and Conceptualism as Predicative Second-Order Theories of Predication. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 21 (3):481-500.
Joan Pagès (2005). Truthmaking and Supervenience. Theoria 20 (2):191-197.
Alexander Bird (2003). Resemblance Nominalism and Counterparts. Analysis 63 (3):221–228.
P. F. Strawson (1961). Singular Terms and Predication. Journal of Philosophy 58 (15):393-412.
Danny Frederick (2011). P. F. Strawson on Predication. Polish Journal of Philosophy 5 (1):39-57.
Stephen P. Schwartz (2002). Kinds, General Terms, and Rigidity: A Reply to LaPorte. Philosophical Studies 109 (3):265 - 277.
Susanne Winkler (1997). Focus and Secondary Predication. Mouton De Gruyter.
Added to index2012-03-18
Total downloads21 ( #177,791 of 1,796,539 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #115,334 of 1,796,539 )
How can I increase my downloads?