Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A redefinition of the standard kinds of predication was r... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A redefinition of the standard kinds of predication was required.

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The relationship between universals and individuals is described in terms of real identity and formal distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This description entails that not all that is predicated of individuals can be directly (formaliter) attributed to their universals and vice versa.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This description also entails that all that is predicated of individuals has to be in some way or another attributed to universals and vice versa.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's Categories already provides a stable taxonomy of predication—essential, accidental, per se, per accidens—sufficient to handle identity and difference in subject-predicate relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Scotus's formal distinction, on which the real identity/formal non-identity framework depends, was rejected by Aquinas as introducing an illicit intermediate between real and conceptual distinctions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the formal distinction fails as a coherent ontological category, the asymmetries in predication it was invoked to explain dissolve, removing the motivation for any redefinition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ockham's nominalism demonstrates that a parsimonious ontology of individuals with no real universals renders formal distinctions between predication types explanatorily otiose.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If all genuine predication reduces to singular terms referring to particulars, no redefinition of predication kinds is required—only elimination of spurious metaphysical categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Aristotle's Categories already provides a stable taxonomy of predication—essenti...If all genuine predication reduces to singular terms referring to particulars, n...If the formal distinction fails as a coherent ontological category, the asymmetr...Ockham's nominalism demonstrates that a parsimonious ontology of individuals wit...
    +4 moreShow less
    Scotus's formal distinction, on which the real identity/formal non-identity fram...The relationship between universals and individuals is described in terms of rea...This description also entails that all that is predicated of individuals has to ...This description entails that not all that is predicated of individuals can be d...

    Similar

    Habitudinal predication is the most general type, implied by the other...83%Denominative predication does not make a predication any less real.76%Formal predication is distinguished from predication by essence precis...76%The ontological presuppositions of habitudinal predication are complet...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: sharpe
    View source passageHide passage
    The description of the relationship between universals and individuals in terms of real identity and formal distinction entails (i) that not all that is predicated of individuals can be directly (formaliter) attributed to their universals and vice versa, but (ii) that all that is predicated of individuals has to be in some way or another attributed to universals and vice versa. Therefore, a redefinition of the standard kinds of predication was required.
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit