Full Idea
I suggest that we reject the notion that just because the predicate 'red' applies to an open class of particulars, therefore there must be a property, redness.
Clarification
Predicates are part of language, properties part of reality
Gist of Idea
It doesn't follow that because there is a predicate there must therefore exist a property
Source
David M. Armstrong (A Theory of Universals [1978], p.8), quoted by DH Mellor / A Oliver - Introduction to 'Properties' §6
Book Reference
'Properties', ed/tr. Mellor,D.H. /Oliver,A [OUP 1997], p.13
A Reaction
At last someone sensible (an Australian) rebuts that absurd idea that our ontology is entirely a feature of our language