more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 4205

[filed under theme 8. Modes of Existence / E. Nominalism / 3. Predicate Nominalism ]

Full Idea

Not every meaningful predicate expresses an existing property; thus 'is non-self-exemplifying' cannot refer to a property, because the property would contradict the predicate.

Gist of Idea

'Is non-self-exemplifying' is a predicate which cannot denote a property (as it would be a contradiction)

Source

E.J. Lowe (A Survey of Metaphysics [2002], p.100)

Book Ref

Lowe,E.J.: 'A Survey of Metaphysics' [OUP 2002], p.100


A Reaction

Needs thought. The example is based on Russell's so-called Barber's Paradox. If it can't be a property, can it be a predicate?


The 13 ideas with the same theme [unversals are really just linguistic predicates]:

Only words can be 'predicated of many'; the universality is just in its mode of signifying [Abelard, by Panaccio]
Universals can't just be words, because words themselves are universals [Russell]
If we apply the same word to different things, it is only because we are willing to do so [Goodman, by Macdonald,C]
Quine has argued that predicates do not have any ontological commitment [Quine, by Armstrong]
Nominalists say predication is relations between individuals, or deny that it refers [Marcus (Barcan)]
Change of temperature in objects is quite independent of the predicates 'hot' and 'cold' [Armstrong]
We want to know what constituents of objects are grounds for the application of predicates [Armstrong]
It doesn't follow that because there is a predicate there must therefore exist a property [Armstrong]
'Predicate Nominalism' says that a 'universal' property is just a predicate applied to lots of things [Armstrong]
If properties were just the meanings of predicates, they couldn't give predicates their meaning [Mellor]
Not all predicates can be properties - 'is non-self-exemplifying', for example [Lowe]
'Is non-self-exemplifying' is a predicate which cannot denote a property (as it would be a contradiction) [Lowe]
There can be predicates with no property, and there are properties with no predicate [Moreland]