more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Goodman argues that the set or class {{a}},{a,b}} is supposed to be distinct from the set or class {{b},{a,b}}, even though both are ultimately constituted from the same a and b.
Gist of Idea
Two objects can apparently make up quite distinct arrangements in sets
Source
report of Nelson Goodman (The Structure of Appearance [1951]) by JP Burgess / G Rosen - A Subject with No Object I.A.2.a
Book Ref
Burgess,J/Rosen,G: 'A Subject with No Object' [OUP 1997], p.27
A Reaction
I'm with Goodman all the way here, even though it is deeply unfashionable, particularly in the circles I move in. If there are trillion grains of sand on a beach, how many sets are we supposed to be committed to?
| 9920 | Two objects can apparently make up quite distinct arrangements in sets [Goodman, by Burgess/Rosen] |
| 7956 | If all and only red things were round things, we would need to specify the 'respect' of the resemblance [Goodman, by Macdonald,C] |
| 7957 | Without respects of resemblance, we would collect blue book, blue pen, red pen, red clock together [Goodman, by Macdonald,C] |
| 7952 | If we apply the same word to different things, it is only because we are willing to do so [Goodman, by Macdonald,C] |
| 15510 | Classes are a host of ethereal, platonic, pseudo entities [Goodman] |
| 10657 | The counties of Utah, and the state, and its acres, are in no way different [Goodman] |