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
    If the categorial difference between relating and being-r... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Bradley's original regress arguments in Appearance and Reality do not establish the unreality of relations

    If the categorial difference between relating and being-related cannot be captured within a flat relational ontology, Bradley's regress reveals an internal incoherence in that ontology rather than importing illicit assumptions.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Key Terms

    Being-related(contrasted with the action of relating)
    The state or condition of already standing in a relationship; the result of two things being connected.
    Bradley's regress(General problem in ontology; Lowe's formal-relation strategy is intended to block it)
    An infinite regress that arises when a relation between constituents of a state of affairs is itself treated as a further constituent requiring yet another relation to bind it, and so on without end
    Categorial difference(describing types of logical distinctions)
    A fundamental distinction between different kinds or categories of things—like the difference between a verb (action) and a noun (thing).
    F.H. Bradley(the philosopher whose argument is referenced)
    A 19th-century British philosopher who argued that our everyday understanding of relations and things doesn't actually hold up under logical scrutiny.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    Flat relational ontology(the philosophical framework being criticized)
    A philosophical view that says all things in reality are fundamentally made up of relationships between objects, without any deeper layers or special categories.
    Illicit assumptions(contrasted with actual problems in the theory itself)
    Questionable or unjustified ideas that someone sneaks into an argument without openly stating them or proving they're valid.
    Internal incoherence(describing what Bradley's regress reveals)
    A contradiction or logical flaw that exists within a theory itself, making it self-defeating or impossible to believe consistently.
    Ontology(Carnap argues this enterprise is based on a mistake)
    The philosophical discipline that tries to answer hard questions about what there really is.
    Relating(contrasted with the state of being related)
    The act or process of one thing being connected to or standing in a relationship with another thing.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedModality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    Bradley's original regress arguments in Appearance and Reality do not establish ...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective