Wilfrid Sellars argued that predication cannot be analyzed as a relation between a thing and a property because properties, as abstract entities, lack the causal-nomological role required for genuine predication.

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

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

Abstract entities(as used in metaphysics and ontology): Things that exist but have no physical form—like numbers, meanings, or concepts; you can't touch them, but they seem real in some sense.
Causal-nomological role(what Sellars says properties need to have for genuine predication): The ability to actually cause things to happen or follow natural laws—basically, having real effects in the world rather than just being an idea floating in our minds.
Genuine predication(what Sellars is concerned with establishing): Real, meaningful talk about properties that actually matters—not just words we use without a solid connection to how the world actually works.
Wilfrid Sellars(The philosopher whose critique is being discussed): A 20th-century American philosopher who made important arguments about how we know things and how language connects to reality.
predication(Soames treats predication as a primitive notion that underlies but does not reduce to belief.): A primitive mental act whereby an agent represents an object as having a property — for example, representing o as red via perception, thought, or nonlinguistic perceptual belief.

2 topics