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
    'Tree' is a natural kind term whose primary semantic func... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Brueckner's claim that premise B* can be true even if there are no trees is doubtful

    'Tree' is a natural kind term whose primary semantic function is to predicate membership in the kind T to which all trees belong

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism1 linked

    Related

    Brueckner's claim that premise B* can be true even if there are no trees is doub...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    For premise B* to express a truth, there must be a natural kind T to which all t...
    If 'tree' has no semantic value, premise B* would express no proposition and wou...
    If there is no such kind T, the general term 'tree' would have no semantic value

    Similar

    'Individual' refers to a member of a species — one countable unit amon...81%Descriptivism holds that the meaning of a natural kind term is a descr...80%Kripke and Putnam imply that natural kind essences are microstructural...80%Univocal terms have a single non-disjunctive definition that captures ...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: skepticism-content-externalism
    View source passageHide passage
    ‘Tree’ is a natural kind term. As such, it is plausible to suppose that this term’s primary semantic function is that of predicating membership in the kind T to which all trees belong. But suppose that there is no such kind T. In this case, the general term ‘tree’ would have no semantic value, since there simply would be no such property as that of belonging to T. As a consequence, Brueckner’s premise B* would express no proposition and would have no truth value, since the term ‘tree’ would make

    Details

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

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective