more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Moderate Class Nominalism and Resemblance Nominalism (in its present form) seem to me to be a single theory presented in different styles.
Gist of Idea
Class Nominalism and Resemblance Nominalism are pretty much the same
Source
David Lewis (New work for a theory of universals [1983], 'Un and Prop' n9)
Book Ref
'Properties', ed/tr. Mellor,D.H. /Oliver,A [OUP 1997], p.194
A Reaction
Lewis has earlier endorsed a cautious form of Class Nominalism (Idea 8570). Which comes first, having a resemblance, or being in a class? Quine seems to make resemblance basic (Idea 8486), but Lewis seems to make the class basic (Idea 8572).
Related Ideas
Idea 8570 To have a property is to be a member of a class, usually a class of things [Lewis]
Idea 8486 Standards of similarity are innate, and the spacing of qualities such as colours can be mapped [Quine]
Idea 8572 Any class of things is a property, no matter how whimsical or irrelevant [Lewis]
| 18442 | You only know an attribute if you know what things have it [Quine] |
| 8504 | Quine aims to deal with properties by the use of eternal open sentences, or classes [Quine, by Devitt] |
| 7970 | Quine is committed to sets, but is more a Class Nominalist than a Platonist [Quine, by Macdonald,C] |
| 8531 | In most sets there is no property common to all the members [Armstrong] |
| 18371 | The class of similar things is much too big a truthmaker for the feature of a particular [Armstrong] |
| 4436 | 'Class Nominalism' may explain properties if we stick to 'natural' sets, and ignore random ones [Armstrong] |
| 4434 | 'Class Nominalism' says that properties or kinds are merely membership of a set (e.g. of white things) [Armstrong] |
| 4435 | 'Class Nominalism' cannot explain co-extensive properties, or sets with random members [Armstrong] |
| 8550 | Triangular and trilateral are coextensive, but different concepts; but powers and properties are the same [Shoemaker] |
| 20339 | Classes rarely share properties with their members - unlike universals and types [Wollheim] |
| 15438 | We can add a primitive natural/unnatural distinction to class nominalism [Lewis] |
| 8570 | To have a property is to be a member of a class, usually a class of things [Lewis] |
| 8574 | Class Nominalism and Resemblance Nominalism are pretty much the same [Lewis] |
| 7032 | Objects join sets because of properties; the property is not bestowed by set membership [Heil] |
| 4233 | If 'blueness' is a set of particulars, there is danger of circularity, or using universals, in identifying the set [Lowe] |
| 4471 | We should abandon the concept of a property since (unlike sets) their identity conditions are unclear [Moreland] |
| 14597 | Natural Class Nominalism says there are primitive classes of things resembling in one respect [Dorr] |