more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 10563

[filed under theme 7. Existence / C. Structure of Existence / 7. Abstract/Concrete / b. Levels of abstraction ]

Full Idea

It is natural to have a generative conception of abstracts (like the iterative conception of sets). The abstracts are formed at stages, with the abstracts formed at any given stage being the abstracts of those concepts of objects formed at prior stages.

Gist of Idea

A generative conception of abstracts proposes stages, based on concepts of previous objects

Source

Kit Fine (Replies on 'Limits of Abstraction' [2005], 1)

Book Ref

-: 'Philosophical Studies' [-], p.370


A Reaction

See 10567 for Fine's later modification. This may not guarantee 'levels', but it implies some sort of conceptual priority between abstract entities.

Related Idea

Idea 10567 We can create objects from conditions, rather than from concepts [Fine,K]


The 14 ideas from 'Replies on 'Limits of Abstraction''

If you ask what F the second-order quantifier quantifies over, you treat it as first-order [Fine,K]
There is no stage at which we can take all the sets to have been generated [Fine,K]
We might combine the axioms of set theory with the axioms of mereology [Fine,K]
Set-theoretic imperialists think sets can represent every mathematical object [Fine,K]
A generative conception of abstracts proposes stages, based on concepts of previous objects [Fine,K]
Abstraction-theoretic imperialists think Fregean abstracts can represent every mathematical object [Fine,K]
We can combine ZF sets with abstracts as urelements [Fine,K]
We can create objects from conditions, rather than from concepts [Fine,K]
Concern for rigour can get in the way of understanding phenomena [Fine,K]
Logicists say mathematics can be derived from definitions, and can be known that way [Fine,K]
Assigning an entity to each predicate in semantics is largely a technical convenience [Fine,K]
Dedekind cuts lead to the bizarre idea that there are many different number 1's [Fine,K]
Why should a Dedekind cut correspond to a number? [Fine,K]
Unless we know whether 0 is identical with the null set, we create confusions [Fine,K]