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
    Sellars's nominalism establishes that apparent reference ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→There are no propositions

    Sellars's nominalism establishes that apparent reference to abstract objects dissolves under analysis into reference to linguistic roles and functional equivalence classes.

    ?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.Language use explains mathematical discourse without positing non-physical abstract objects that raise metaphysical puzzles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Linguistic roles and functional equivalence classes are ontologically transparent and empirically investigable, unlike abstract objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Our successful scientific practice requires only structural patterns in language, not commitment to Platonic realm of abstracts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Reducing abstract objects to linguistic roles threatens to make mathematics depend on contingent facts about human language practices.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Functional equivalence classes still seem to be abstract objects themselves, so the nominalist analysis appears circular or incomplete.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mathematical truths appear mind-independent and language-independent, but linguistic analysis suggests they depend on our conventions.
      ?

      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 linked claim · 2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked
    There are no propositions

    Related

    Functional equivalence classes still seem to be abstract objects themselves, so ...Language use explains mathematical discourse without positing non-physical abstr...Linguistic roles and functional equivalence classes are ontologically transparen...Mathematical truths appear mind-independent and language-independent, but lingui...
    +3 moreShow less
    Our successful scientific practice requires only structural patterns in language...Reducing abstract objects to linguistic roles threatens to make mathematics depe...There are no propositions

    Details

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