more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
What I call 'creative definitions' are made from a standpoint in which the existence of the objects that are to be assigned to the terms is not presupposed.
Gist of Idea
'Creative definitions' do not presuppose the existence of the objects defined
Source
Kit Fine (The Limits of Abstraction [2002], II.1)
Book Ref
Fine,Kit: 'The Limits of Abstraction' [OUP 2008], p.56
| 16094 | You can't define particulars, because accounts have to be generalised [Aristotle] |
| 12983 | A nominal definition is of the qualities, but the real definition is of the essential inner structure [Leibniz] |
| 4417 | Only that which has no history is definable [Nietzsche] |
| 16877 | A 'constructive' (as opposed to 'analytic') definition creates a new sign [Frege] |
| 14426 | A definition by 'extension' enumerates items, and one by 'intension' gives a defining property [Russell] |
| 13838 | A decent modern definition should always imply a semantics [Hacking] |
| 11221 | A definition can be 'extensionally', 'intensionally' or 'sense' adequate [Gupta] |
| 11224 | Traditional definitions are general identities, which are sentential and reductive [Gupta] |
| 11226 | Traditional definitions need: same category, mention of the term, and conservativeness and eliminability [Gupta] |
| 9143 | Implicit definitions must be satisfiable, creative definitions introduce things, contextual definitions build on things [Fine,K, by Cook/Ebert] |
| 10143 | 'Creative definitions' do not presuppose the existence of the objects defined [Fine,K] |