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
    An object has a property because a predicate denotes it, ... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    An object has a property because a predicate denotes it, not the other way around

    Philosophy of Language
    ?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 properties an object has depend on what predicates apply to it
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Therefore 'gray' does not denote an object because the object has the property of being gray; rather, the object has that property because 'gray' denotes it
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Objects possess intrinsic physical properties (wavelength reflectance, molecular structure) that exist independently of any linguistic system.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Predicates like 'gray' were coined precisely because objects already exhibited mind-independent perceptual features that grouped them naturally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If predicates constituted properties rather than tracking them, successful cross-linguistic reference to the same property would be inexplicable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kripke and Putnam's causal-historical semantics establishes that natural kind terms rigidly designate properties fixed by the world, not by descriptive conventions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim inverts the correct semantic direction: 'gray' denotes the property because competent speakers were causally linked to gray things, not the reverse.
      ?

      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 Language

    Related

    If predicates constituted properties rather than tracking them, successful cross...Kripke and Putnam's causal-historical semantics establishes that natural kind te...Objects possess intrinsic physical properties (wavelength reflectance, molecular...Predicates like 'gray' were coined precisely because objects already exhibited m...
    +3 moreShow less
    The claim inverts the correct semantic direction: 'gray' denotes the property be...The properties an object has depend on what predicates apply to itTherefore 'gray' does not denote an object because the object has the property o...

    Similar

    If an object possesses a property, true things can be said about that ...88%The meaning of a predicate is the property for which it stands86%The concept of property does not properly apply to abstract objects.84%The properties an object has depend on what predicates apply to it84%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: depiction
    View source passageHide passage
    Goodman does not define denotation, beyond describing it as a variety of reference, but two features of his conception of denotation should be noted. First, it is supposed to be the relation in which a name stands to its bearer, or a predicate stands to the members of its extension, or a portrait stands to its subject. Hence the controversial doctrine that predicates and names have the same semantic function is implicit in Goodman’s theory of depiction (Geach 1972; Strawson 1976; Hyman 2006: 185
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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