On an aristotelian theory of universals

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 57 (1):51 – 58 (1979)
A theory purporting to solve the problem of universals must be able to explain predication, recurrence, and classification. How Platonism does this is well known. Here I take a hard look at an attempt by M.J. Cresswell to give an Aristotelian answer and show it to be a complete and utter failure. The answer does not eliminate commitment to universals and it is only half an answer anyway because it does not cover relational predicates, an omission that Russell noted dooms answers by other philosophers as well.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/00048407912341031
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 28,840
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Theory of Knowledge.Roderick M. Chisholm - 1966 - Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall.
Knowledge.Keith Lehrer - 1974 - Clarendon Press.
Thinking and Experience.H. H. Price - 1953 - Philosophical Review 63 (1):93-98.
Essence and Accident.Irving M. Copi - 1954 - Journal of Philosophy 51 (23):706-719.
What is Aristotle's Theory of Universals?M. J. Cresswell - 1975 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 53 (3):238 – 247.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

24 ( #213,129 of 2,178,217 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #316,497 of 2,178,217 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums