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
    The cookie cutter model of types — the idea that a type i... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The cookie cutter model of types — the idea that a type is a perceptible pattern that all tokens resemble — does not work

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's family resemblance argument shows that type-members share overlapping similarities rather than a single common perceptible pattern.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If no single perceptible pattern is shared by all tokens, the cookie cutter model's core mechanism — pattern-matching — cannot be the basis for type-membership.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Homographic words like 'bank' demonstrate that perceptually identical tokens belong to distinct types, severing resemblance from type-individuation entirely.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Peirce's original type-token distinction was grounded in abstract law-like relations, not perceptual resemblance, making the cookie cutter model a misreading of the framework's own foundation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Abstract objects like the word-type 'the' lack spatiotemporal location and therefore cannot serve as a perceptible pattern that tokens could literally resemble.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.There are generally no properties had by all and only tokens of a given word type (not same phonological structure, nor same sense, nor same spelling)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Not all tokens of a type have any natural projectible property except for the property of being tokens of the same type
      ?

      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

    Related

    Abstract objects like the word-type 'the' lack spatiotemporal location and there...Homographic words like 'bank' demonstrate that perceptually identical tokens bel...If no single perceptible pattern is shared by all tokens, the cookie cutter mode...Not all tokens of a type have any natural projectible property except for the pr...
    +3 moreShow less
    Peirce's original type-token distinction was grounded in abstract law-like relat...There are generally no properties had by all and only tokens of a given word typ...Wittgenstein's family resemblance argument shows that type-members share overlap...

    Similar

    Word types are legitimate theoretical objects whose primary function i...83%Without tokens to derive representational features from, uninstantiate...79%A type can be tokened numerous times but is not identical with any sin...78%Intention helps identify which type a token is a token of, but cannot ...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: types-tokens
    View source passageHide passage
    However, as we saw in §4, generally there are no such properties had by all and only tokens of a type, at least in the case of words—not same phonological structure, nor same sense nor same spelling. Not all tokens have any such natural projectible property (except for the property of being tokens of the same type). It should be clear from §4 that the cookie cutter model—the idea of the type as just a perceptible pattern for what all the tokens look like—does not work. Goodman (1972, pp. 437-8)
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit