Lexicon of Arguments

 

III 8/9
Actualism/Armstrong per: not assuming possible things under any circumstances - but past + future are real and do exist - truthmaker must be actual. >Truthmakers.
III 125
Anti-Actualism/Armstrong: (E.g. uninstantiated idiosyncratic reaction between particles with high probability). Someone might say, "there might also have been a different reaction" the law of excluded middle applies - Armstrong: someone like this assumes non-actual physically possible states that also involve particulars; because they are part of the ontology, they are defined.
ArmstrongVs: that is extreme non-actualism.
Solution: instead: non-factualism: there are no facts here - that is why the law of excluded middle fails here. >Nonfactualism, >Universals, >Nominalism.
III 135
Actualism/Probability/Armstrong: rejects irreducible potentialities (possibilia) - (Armstrong ditto) - Question: Is probability not merely an unrealized possibility? - ArmstrongVs: it is a fact which other categorical properties the object has.