Full Idea
Should we decide what universals exist a priori (probably on semantic grounds, identifying them with the meanings of general words), or a posteriori (looking to our best general theories about nature to give revisable conjectures about universals)?
Gist of Idea
Should we decide which universals exist a priori (through words), or a posteriori (through science)?
Source
David M. Armstrong (Universals [1995], p.505)
Book Reference
'A Companion to Metaphysics', ed/tr. Kim,Jaegwon/Sosa,Ernest [Blackwell 1995], p.505
A Reaction
Nice question for a realist. Although the problem is first perceived in the use of language, if we think universals are a real feature of nature, we should pursue them scientifically, say I.