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
    Sentences like 'Redness is a property' and 'The north-of ... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Sentences like 'Redness is a property' and 'The north-of relation holds between San Francisco and Los Angeles' commit us to the existence of the property of redness and the north-of relation

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.These sentences contain singular terms that denote the property of redness and the north-of relation
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.These sentences are true
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Singular term position in a grammatical sentence does not entail ontological commitment to a corresponding entity (Quine, 'On What There Is').
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Paraphrase strategies can eliminate apparent reference to abstract entities while preserving the truth-conditions of such sentences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Only existentially quantified sentences in a regimented canonical notation—not surface grammar—reveal genuine ontological commitments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Predicate nominalism holds that 'Redness is a property' is true in virtue of red particulars resembling one another, not in virtue of a shared universal.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A sentence can be true without its grammatical subjects denoting mind-independent abstract objects, as trope theory and ostrich nominalism both demonstrate.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Key Terms

    Commit us to the existence of(as used in ontology)
    When you say something is true, you're logically forced to accept that certain things must be real. For example, saying 'my car is red' commits you to accepting that colors actually exist.
    Ontology(Carnap argues this enterprise is based on a mistake)
    The philosophical discipline that tries to answer hard questions about what there really is.
    property(Locke's demonstration of the moral proposition 'Where there is no property, there is no injustice.')
    A right to something.
    relation(Aristotelian category theory)
    An Aristotelian category whose existence requires two possibilities, one for each subject standing in contrast, as opposed to the other nine categories which require only one possibility in one subject.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    A sentence can be true without its grammatical subjects denoting mind-independen...Only existentially quantified sentences in a regimented canonical notation—not s...Paraphrase strategies can eliminate apparent reference to abstract entities whil...Predicate nominalism holds that 'Redness is a property' is true in virtue of red...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: platonism
    View source passageHide passage
    In order to make out a version of the singular term argument here, platonists would need to begin by arguing that these sentences commit us to the existence of the property of redness and the north-of relation, respectively, because (a) they have singular terms that denote those things, and (b) they are true. In order to motivate claim (a), platonists would have to refute the paraphrase-nominalist claim that sentences like (P1) and (R1) are equivalent to sentences like ‘Mars is red’ and ‘San Fra
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    +3 moreShow less
    Singular term position in a grammatical sentence does not entail ontological com...These sentences are trueThese sentences contain singular terms that denote the property of redness and t...

    Similar

    Sentences like 'Redness is a property' and 'The north-of relation hold...87%These sentences contain singular terms that denote the property of red...87%Sentences like 'Mars is red' do not entail the existence of properties...86%Sentences like 'Redness is a property' are equivalent in meaning to se...82%
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit