The problem of Universals
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29393/CF42-2PUED10002Keywords:
Universals, Propierties, Philosophical problems, ExplanationAbstract
This paper discusses which is the most appropriate formulation of the problem of universals. I present my discussion by contrasting it with the proposal on this topic put forward by Rodriguez-Pereyra (2000), and I claim that, even if his attempt at formulating the problem by taking into account Nozick’s (1981) general discussion of philosophical problems is illuminating, his proposal to the effect that the problem of universals would be solved by offering the truthmakers of statements expressing simple singular predications (instances of what he calls the “many over one”) is inadequately grounded. Towards the end of the paper I defend the idea that, in keeping with a more traditional take on the problem, what it actually demands is ontological assays of instances of the so-called “one over many”.
Downloads
References
Armstrong, D. M. (1978). Universals and scientific realism. Cambridge University Press.
Armstrong, D. M. (1989). Universals: An opinionated introduction. Westview Press.
Campbell, K. (1990). Abstract particulars. Blackwell.
Devitt, M. (1980). 'Ostrich nominalism' or 'mirage realism'? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 61(4), 433–439.
Galluzzo, G., & Loux, M. J. (Eds.). (2015). The problem of universals in contemporary philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Knight, C. (2023). Reflective equilibrium. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2023 ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2023/entries/reflective-equilibrium/
Lewis, D. K. (1983). Philosophical papers (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.
Loux, M. J. (1998). Metaphysics: A contemporary introduction. Routledge.
Loux, M. J. (2015). An exercise in constituent ontology. In G. Galluzzo & M. J. Loux (Eds.), The problem of universals in contemporary philosophy (pp. 9–45). Cambridge University Press.
MacBride, F. (2002). The problem of universals and the limits of truth-making. Philosophical Papers, 31(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/05568640209485093
Nozick, R. (1981). Philosophical explanations. Harvard University Press.
Oliver, A. (1996). The metaphysics of properties. Mind, 105(417), 1–80.
Peacock, H. (2009). What's wrong with ostrich nominalism? Philosophical Papers, 38(2), 183–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/05568640903146518
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
Rodriguez-Pereyra, G. (2000). What is the problem of universals? Mind, 109(434), 255–273.
Rodriguez-Pereyra, G. (2002a). Resemblance nominalism: A solution to the problem of universals. Oxford University Press.
Rodriguez-Pereyra, G. (2002b). The problem of universals and the limits of conceptual analysis. Philosophical Papers, 31(1), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/05568640209485094
Rodriguez-Pereyra, G. (2003). Particulares y universales. In J. González & E. Trías (Eds.), Enciclopedia Iberoamericana de Filosofía: Cuestiones metafísicas (pp. 225–246). Trotta Editorial.
Van Inwagen, P. (1990). Material beings. Cornell University Press.
Williams, D. C. (1953). On the elements of being. The Review of Metaphysics, 7(1), 3–18.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
