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
    The argument against structural universals can be extende... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The argument against structural universals can be extended to work against universals in general

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    0 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A theory of universals must postulate states of affairs (per Armstrong)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The state of affairs that Rab necessitates that b exists, which constitutes a necessary connection between wholly distinct existences
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Causation
    1 linked

    Related

    A theory of universals must postulate states of affairs (per Armstrong)The state of affairs that Rab necessitates that b exists, which constitutes a ne...

    Similar

    Defenders of universals can escape the problem by accepting simple, no...87%The traditional argument for universals from shared predication fails82%A structural universal is exemplified by a complex object whose simple...81%Lange's argument is flawed because an instance of a universal generali...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: nominalism-metaphysics
    View source passageHide passage
    This, in itself, is not an argument against universals per se but only against structural universals. Even so, if a theory of universals must postulate states of affairs, as Armstrong thinks it must, then the argument can be made to work against universals in general. For the state of affairs that Rab (where R is any non-symmetrical relation) necessitates that b exists, which seems to be a necessary connection between wholly distinct existences. And saying that a, b and R are parts of the state
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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