Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'The Value of Science', 'Structure and Ontology' and 'Resemblance Nominalism: a solution to universals'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


3 ideas

8. Modes of Existence / E. Nominalism / 2. Resemblance Nominalism
Entities are truthmakers for their resemblances, so no extra entities or 'resemblances' are needed [Rodriquez-Pereyra]
     Full Idea: A and B are the sole truthmakers for 'A and B resemble each other'. There is no need to postulate extra entities - the resembling entities suffice to account for them. There is no regress of resemblances, ...since there are no resemblances at all.
     From: Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra (Resemblance Nominalism: a solution to universals [2002], p.115), quoted by Douglas Edwards - Properties 5.5.2
     A reaction: This seems to flatly reject the ordinary conversational move of asking in what 'respect' the two things resemble, which may be a genuine puzzle which gets an illuminating answer. We can't fully explain resemblance, but we can do better than this!
18. Thought / E. Abstraction / 3. Abstracta by Ignoring
A structure is an abstraction, focussing on relationships, and ignoring other features [Shapiro]
     Full Idea: A structure is the abstract form of a system, focussing on the interrelationships among the objects, and ignoring any features of them that do not affect how they relate to other objects in the system.
     From: Stewart Shapiro (Structure and Ontology [1989], 146), quoted by James Robert Brown - Philosophy of Mathematics Ch.4
     A reaction: I find this account very attractive, even though it appeals to supposedly outmoded psychological abstractionism. It seems pretty close to Aristotle's view of things. Shapiro's account must face up to Frege's worries about these matters.
26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 11. Against Laws of Nature
The aim of science is just to create a comprehensive, elegant language to describe brute facts [Poincaré, by Harré]
     Full Idea: In Poincaré's view, we try to construct a language within which the brute facts of experience are expressed as comprehensively and as elegantly as possible. The job of science is the forging of a language precisely suited to that purpose.
     From: report of Henri Poincaré (The Value of Science [1906], Pt III) by Rom Harré - Laws of Nature 2
     A reaction: I'm often struck by how obscure and difficult our accounts of self-evident facts can be. Chairs are easy, and the metaphysics of chairs is hideous. Why is that? I'm a robust realist, but I like Poincaré's idea. He permits facts.