Combining Philosophers

Ideas for Cynthia Macdonald, Bernard Linsky and Ren Descartes

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these philosophers

display all the ideas for this combination of philosophers


3 ideas

8. Modes of Existence / D. Universals / 1. Universals
Five universals: genus, species, difference, property, accident [Descartes]
     Full Idea: The five commonly enumerated universals are: genus, species, difference, property and accident.
     From: René Descartes (Principles of Philosophy [1646], I.59)
     A reaction: Interestingly, this seems to be Descartes passing on his medieval Aristotelian inheritance, in which things are defined by placing them in a class, and then noting what distinguishes them within that class.
8. Modes of Existence / D. Universals / 2. Need for Universals
Numerical sameness is explained by theories of identity, but what explains qualitative identity? [Macdonald,C]
     Full Idea: We can distinguish between numerical identity and qualitative identity. Numerical sameness is explained by a theory of identity, but what explains qualitative sameness?
     From: Cynthia Macdonald (Varieties of Things [2005], Ch.6)
     A reaction: The distinction is between type and token identity. Tokens are particulars, and types are sets, so her question comes down to the one of what entitles something to be a member of a set? Nothing, if sets are totally conventional, but they aren't.
8. Modes of Existence / D. Universals / 6. Platonic Forms / b. Partaking
How can universals connect instances, if they are nothing like them? [Macdonald,C]
     Full Idea: The 'one over many' problem is to explain how universals can unify their instances if they are wholly other than them.
     From: Cynthia Macdonald (Varieties of Things [2005], Ch.6)
     A reaction: If universals are self-predicating (beauty is beautiful) then they have a massive amount in common, despite one being general. You then have the regress problem of explaining the beauty of the beautiful. Baffling regress, or baffling participation.