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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Frege's distinction between concept and object shows that universal terms function as unsaturated predicates, not objects that can themselves receive predication.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.We can meaningfully predicate properties of properties: 'redness is a color' treats a universal as a legitimate subject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Modern logic successfully formalizes universals as bound variables and sets without requiring Frege's saturation distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The unsaturated/saturated distinction itself lacks clear criteria, making it unclear what counts as genuinely 'incomplete.'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Predicates like 'is red' require completion by objects; they cannot themselves be subjects without changing logical type.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Universal terms appear in different grammatical positions than singular terms, suggesting fundamentally different logical categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Treating universals as objects leads to infinite regress: properties would need properties, violating Occam's razor.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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