17 ideas
9331 | How do we determine which of the sentences containing a term comprise its definition? [Horwich] |
16648 | Accidents must have formal being, if they are principles of real action, and of mental action and thought [Duns Scotus] |
8499 | Nominalists cannot translate 'red resembles pink more than blue' into particulars [Jackson] |
15386 | If only the singular exists, science is impossible, as that relies on true generalities [Duns Scotus, by Panaccio] |
15387 | If things were singular they would only differ numerically, but horse and tulip differ more than that [Duns Scotus, by Panaccio] |
8500 | Colour resemblance isn't just resemblance between things; 'colour' must be mentioned [Jackson] |
16632 | We distinguish one thing from another by contradiction, because this is, and that is not [Duns Scotus] |
13094 | The haecceity is the featureless thing which gives ultimate individuality to a substance [Duns Scotus, by Cover/O'Leary-Hawthorne] |
16770 | It is absurd that there is no difference between a genuinely unified thing, and a mere aggregate [Duns Scotus] |
10919 | What prevents a stone from being divided into parts which are still the stone? [Duns Scotus] |
16768 | Two things are different if something is true of one and not of the other [Duns Scotus] |
9333 | A priori belief is not necessarily a priori justification, or a priori knowledge [Horwich] |
9342 | Understanding needs a priori commitment [Horwich] |
9332 | Meaning is generated by a priori commitment to truth, not the other way around [Horwich] |
9341 | Meanings and concepts cannot give a priori knowledge, because they may be unacceptable [Horwich] |
9334 | If we stipulate the meaning of 'number' to make Hume's Principle true, we first need Hume's Principle [Horwich] |
9339 | A priori knowledge (e.g. classical logic) may derive from the innate structure of our minds [Horwich] |