more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 8565

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

Full Idea

One reason for denying that properties just are the meanings of our predicates is that, if they were, they could not give our predicates their meanings.

Gist of Idea

If properties were just the meanings of predicates, they couldn't give predicates their meaning

Source

D.H. Mellor (Properties and Predicates [1991], 'Props')

Book Ref

'Properties', ed/tr. Mellor,D.H. /Oliver,A [OUP 1997], p.257


A Reaction

Neither way round sounds quite right to me. Predicate nominalism is wrong, but what is meant by a property 'giving' a predicate its meaning? It doesn't seem to allow room for error in our attempts to name the properties.


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]