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 existence of general predicates like 'is red' does no... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The existence of general predicates like 'is red' does not entail that objects share a single determinable property called redness

    Modality & PossibilityPhilosophy 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.Resemblance nominalism, defended by Rodriguez-Pereiro, grounds predicate application in pairwise resemblance relations among particulars, not shared universals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Two red objects may resemble each other more closely than either resembles a blue object without both instantiating a single property called redness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If resemblance relations do the explanatory work attributed to determinable properties, positing redness as a real shared property violates Ockham's Razor.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's 'family resemblance' account shows that items falling under a common predicate need share no single common property, only overlapping similarities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If family resemblance suffices for predicate application, then 'is red' can unify objects through networks of resemblance without requiring a shared determinable redness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.General terms do not necessarily denote abstract ideas that correspond to real features of reality
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It is an uncritical tendency to 'read off' features of reality from ways of speaking about it
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if the predicate 'is red' truly applies to multiple objects, this does not require those objects to possess the very same property
      ?

      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 LanguageModality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge2 linked

    Related

    Even if the predicate 'is red' truly applies to multiple objects, this does not ...General terms do not necessarily denote abstract ideas that correspond to real f...If family resemblance suffices for predicate application, then 'is red' can unif...If resemblance relations do the explanatory work attributed to determinable prop...
    +4 moreShow less
    It is an uncritical tendency to 'read off' features of reality from ways of spea...Resemblance nominalism, defended by Rodriguez-Pereiro, grounds predicate applica...Two red objects may resemble each other more closely than either resembles a blu...Wittgenstein's 'family resemblance' account shows that items falling under a com...

    Similar

    Even if the predicate 'is red' truly applies to multiple objects, this...92%Sentences like 'Mars is red' do not entail the existence of properties...87%'The ball has the property of redness' does commit to the existence of...82%If one accepts that 'the ball has the property of redness' is true, on...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: determinate-determinables
    View source passageHide passage
    While motivated by the previous concerns, anti-realists about determinables also aim to explain or explain away (or “debunk”) at least some seeming motivations for determinables. A common debunking strategy appeals to something like Berkeley’s (1710) claim that it is a mistake to suppose that general terms denote abstract ideas.[21] For example, Heil (2003) echoes Berkeley’s claim, taking seeming semantic reasons for positing determinables to reflect an uncritical tendency to suppose that “we
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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