Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that In a judgment 'S is P', the subject and predicate are meant both to be diverse and to form a unity.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Frege's analysis shows 'S is P' expresses a function-argument structure, not a unity of diverse entities but a truth-value via predication.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If S and P form genuine unity, the copula 'is' becomes redundant, collapsing judgment into mere identity, which Frege's concept-object distinction forbids.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Russell's multiple relation theory holds that judgment relates a mind to several objects independently, so no intrinsic S-P unity exists in the proposition itself.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The etymological inference from 'Urteil' to ontological structure commits a genetic fallacy, deriving logical form from linguistic accident rather than semantic analysis.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Etymologically, Urteil (judgment) involves Teilung (separation) of parts, so S and P are diverse.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
In saying 'S is P', the judging subject affirms the unity existing between S and P.
?
How convincing is this?
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.