1 / 8

Universals: conceptualism

Universals: conceptualism. Michael Lacewing enquiries@alevelphilosophy.co.uk. Ontology. What exists? Particular things These are classified: whale, animal, living thing, physical object These classifications are not arbitrary – all whales have something in common, all animals do, etc.

thuber
Download Presentation

Universals: conceptualism

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Universals: conceptualism Michael Lacewing enquiries@alevelphilosophy.co.uk

  2. Ontology • What exists? • Particular things • These are classified: whale, animal, living thing, physical object • These classifications are not arbitrary – all whales have something in common, all animals do, etc. • ‘Being a whale’/’whaleness’ – does this property exist?

  3. Alternatives • What do all honest people have in common? • Realism: Honesty – this is a noun, and nouns pick out a ‘something’ • Nominalism (predicate): the term ‘honest’ applies to them • In virtue of similarities between them • Nominalism (conceptualism): they all fall under the concept HONEST

  4. Conceptualism • Nominalism: only particular things exist • We classify particular things using general concepts • ‘Honest’ doesn’t mean the concept HONEST (properties aren’t concepts) • But something has the property honesty in virtue of falling under the concept HONEST

  5. Advantage • Not all concepts/general terms have reference, e.g. WITCH • Over predicate nominalism: ‘witch’ can’t refer to the resemblances between particulars • Over realism: ‘witch’ can’t refer to a universal • But ‘witch’ has meaning – derived from the concept WITCH

  6. Objections • Where do our concepts/classifications come from? • Must be similarities or resemblance between particulars • But then ‘resemblance’ is itself what is fundamental, not the concept • Russell: ‘resemblance’ is a relation, and relations are universals! • What’s the origin of the concept ‘resemblance’? Real similarities

  7. Objections • Without universals, we can’t explain our abilities to recognise, categorise or generalise about particulars • But concepts aren’t all-or-nothing, as universals are, e.g. prototype analysis • Without universals, explanations fail • E.g. why did the scales move? Because of the weight • The weight of a particular is independent of us, even if the system of weight is not

  8. Discussion • General terms may derive their meaning from our concepts, but the story can’t stop their – our concepts must derive from reality • Concepts that correspond to reality pick out universals; for concepts that do not, e.g. WITCH, there are no universals • Alternative: reality is mind-dependent?

More Related