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
    Nominalists like Quine and Nelson Goodman argue that posi... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Word types are legitimate theoretical objects whose primary function is to unify tokens that share no common perceptible property

    Nominalists like Quine and Nelson Goodman argue that positing abstract unifying objects violates ontological parsimony when functional equivalents exist.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Occam's Razor requires minimizing ontological commitments without explanatory loss.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Concrete particulars and their relations can replicate all explanatory work abstract objects perform.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Abstract objects create epistemological puzzles (access, identity) that concrete alternatives avoid.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Mathematical and logical truths seem to require abstract objects as their truthmakers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Nominalist 'functional equivalents' often covertly reintroduce abstract entities through backdoor commitments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Parsimony about entities shouldn't override explanatory power and theoretical elegance.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Abstract objects create epistemological puzzles (access, identity) that concrete...Concrete particulars and their relations can replicate all explanatory work abst...Mathematical and logical truths seem to require abstract objects as their truthm...Nominalist 'functional equivalents' often covertly reintroduce abstract entities...
    +3 moreShow less
    Occam's Razor requires minimizing ontological commitments without explanatory lo...Parsimony about entities shouldn't override explanatory power and theoretical el...Word types are legitimate theoretical objects whose primary function is to unify...

    Details

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