Combining Texts

Ideas for 'works', 'Perception' and 'On the Plurality of Worlds'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these texts

display all the ideas for this combination of texts


3 ideas

8. Modes of Existence / D. Universals / 1. Universals
Universals recur, are multiply located, wholly present, make things overlap, and are held in common [Lewis]
     Full Idea: One and the same universal recurs; it is multiply located; it is wholly present in both instances, a shared common part whereby the two instances overlap. Being alike by sharing a universal is 'having something in common' in an absolutely literal sense.
     From: David Lewis (On the Plurality of Worlds [1986], 1.5)
     A reaction: A helpful spelling out of the commitment involved (in Armstrong and others) in belief in universals. To me this is a convenient list of reasons why the whole proposal is nonsense. Why does Lewis take them seriously?
If particles were just made of universals, similar particles would be the same particle [Lewis]
     Full Idea: We cannot say that a particle is composed entirely of its several universals, because then another particle exactly like it would have the very same universals, and yet the two particles would not be the same.
     From: David Lewis (On the Plurality of Worlds [1986], 1.5)
     A reaction: This is an argument either (implausibly) for haecceities or characterless substrata, or else for tropes (which are all separate, unlike universals). Particles as bundles of universals is not a theory I take seriously.
8. Modes of Existence / D. Universals / 3. Instantiated Universals
Universals aren't parts of things, because that relationship is transitive, and universals need not be [Lewis]
     Full Idea: It cannot be said that a universal is instantiated by anything that has it as a part, since the relation of part to whole is transitive. If charge is part of a particle, which is part of an atom, then charge is part of the atom, but an atom isn't charged.
     From: David Lewis (On the Plurality of Worlds [1986], 1.5)
     A reaction: Given the total mystery involved in 'instantiation', it wouldn't surprise me if someone appealed to the part-whole relation, but all moves to explain instantiation are desperate. Make it a primitive, if you must, then tiptoe away.