Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Screenshot Tabelle Begriffe

Universals: universals are expressions for what objects may have in common, e.g. a certain color. Examples for universals are redness, roundness, difference, value. The ontological status of universals as something independent of thought - that is, their existence - is controversial. Nevertheless it is undisputed that we form terms for generalization and successfully use them. See also general terms, general, generalization, ontology, existence, conceptual realism, realism, ideas, participation, sortals, conceptualism, nominalism.

Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments.

Author Item Summary Meta data

Books on Amazon
I 88
Universals/Strawson: E.g. repeated tone - same chord in various concert halls.
I 176
Universals/Strawson: Tradition: only universals and particular-universals (E.g. be-married to John) can be predicted - particulars can never be predicted.
I 215
a) Type-universals: provides classification principle, does require none - E.g. generic names - b) characterizing universals: E.g. verbs, adjectives: deliver classification-principle - only for previously classified particulars - but also particulars themselves provide "principle of summary": E.g. Socrates as well as wisdom -> "attributive binding": (non-relational relation between particulars of different types).
I 216
Example of characterizing binding between Socrates and the universal death corresponds to the attributive binding between Socrates and his death - see copula.
I 251
Universals/Quine/Strawson: should only appear as predicates - pro "nominalism" - StrawsonVsQuine: the language terms of this analysis, already presuppose the existence of subject-expressions.
I 250
Essential feature-universals/essential feature-localizing findings/Strawson: E.g. it rains now - snow falls - here is water - no subject-predicate sentences - here no characterizing-universals, but types of material - also no type-universals - the least to make any empirical statements - introduction with demonstrative - N.B.: does not require particular - E.g. Cat essential feature: a) for the same cat, b) for another cat.
I 277
Essential-feature-universal/essential feature-localizing/Strawson: the corresponding essential feature-findings actually introduce things - but are not subject terms or subject phrases - "here"/"now" set no limits - (even if they are quantifiable, "there is no point in time ").
I 279
Things are not introduced by space and time adverbs.

Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.

Str I
P.F. Strawson
Einzelding und logisches Subjekt Stuttgart 1972

Str IV
P.F. Strawson
Analyse und Metaphysik München 1994

Str V
P.F. Strawson
Die Grenzen des Sinns Frankfurt 1981

Send Link
> Counter arguments against Strawson
> Counter arguments in relation to Universals

Authors A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  

Concepts A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-10-20