Journals / Iğdır Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 20

The Problem of Abstract Reference and Nominalist Explanation

Soyut Referans Problemi ve Nominalist Açıklaması

Pages
1–18
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, these four criteria are not successful in determining the exact reference of abstract terms.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The terms designate to properties are called abstract terms.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The theories that answer the problem of universals, which is one of the important problems of philosophy, are expected to answer the question of what the references of abstract terms.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, these four criteria are not successful in determining the exact reference of abstract terms.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Soyut terimler · tekil terimler · nominalizm

Abstract

The terms designate to properties are called abstract terms. The theories that answer the problem of universals, which is one of the important problems of philosophy, are expected to answer the question of what the references of abstract terms. In this study, the explanation which the nominalist approach tries to bring to the abstract problem is evaluated. Nominalists claim that the abstract terms are singular terms. The four criteria that nominalism put forward to determine the reference of the individual terms are examined and the criticisms directed against these criteria are discussed. As a result, these four criteria are not successful in determining the exact reference of abstract terms.

Özet

Nitelikleri isimlendiren terimlere soyut terimler denilmektedir. Felsefenin önemli problemlerinden birisi olan tümeller problemine cevap veren teorilerin bu terimlerin referanslarının ne olduğu sorusuna cevap vermesi beklenir. Bu çalışmada, nominalist yaklaşımın soyut terimler problemine getirmeye çalıştığı açıklama değerlendirilmiştir. Nominalistler, soyut terimlerin tekil terimler olduğunu iddia ederler. Nominalizmin tekil terimlerin referansını belirlemek üzere ortaya koyduğu dört kriter incelenmiş ve bu kriterlere yöneltilen eleştiriler ele alınmıştır. Sonuç olarak bu dört kriterin tam olarak soyut terimlerin referansını belirlemede başarılı olamadığı görülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZDİL, M. S. (2022). The Problem of Abstract Reference and Nominalist Explanation. Iğdır Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 20, 1–18. https://ajindex.com/articles/538833

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Armstrong, David Malet. Nominalism and Realism: Volume 1: Universals and Scientific Realism. Cambridge University Press, 1978.
  2. Dummett, Michael. “Frege on Functions: A Reply”. The Philosophical Review 64, sy 1 (1955): 96-107. https://doi.org/10.2307/2182235.
  3. Dummett, Michael A. E. Frege; Philosophy of Language. Harper & Row, 1973.
  4. Hale, Bob. Abstract Objects. Oxford, UK; New York, NY, USA: Blackwell Pub, 1988.
  5. Jackson, Frank. “Statements about Universals”. Mind 86, sy 343 (1977): 427-29.
  6. Loux, Michael J. Substance and Attribute: A Study in Ontology. 1978 edi- tion. Dordrecht: Springer, 1978.
  7. Pap, Arthur. “Nominalism, Empiricism and Universals--I”. The Philo- sophical Quarterly (1950-) 9, sy 37 (1959): 330-40. https://doi.org/10.2307/2216366.
  8. Quine, W. V. “Identity, Ostension, and Hypostasis”. The Journal of Philosophy 47, sy 22 (1950): 621-33.
  9. Quine, W. V. Word and Object. Cambridge, Mass: M.I.T. Press, 1960.
  10. Stirton, William R. “Singular Term, Subject and Predicate”. The Philo- sophical Quarterly (1950-) 50, sy 199 (2000): 191-207.
  11. Wetzel, Linda. “Dummett’s Criteria for Singular Terms”. Mind 99, sy 394 (1990): 239-54.