-
1
-
-
61449447165
-
-
One might wonder whether it is right to assume that the hypothesised spatial relations of universals match the varying spatial relations of the objects that instantiate these universals. Consider two alternative assumptions, 1) Assume that if simultaneous instantiations of universals X and Y differ in their spatial relations with respect to another universal, then X is not identical to Y. There cannot be a case in which U is two feet from V and U is three feet from V, at the same time. Although this alternative assumption would stop the argument from starting, it means thinking of X and Y more like tropes than universals and is, hence, off limits to the proponent of the universals, 2 Assume that the spatial relations among universals mismatch those of the instantiating objects. For example, even if a red and a blue object are two feet apart, their colours may be a different distance apart, say eight feet. This alternative assumption, however, is both implausible and not neces
-
One might wonder whether it is right to assume that the hypothesised spatial relations of universals match the varying spatial relations of the objects that instantiate these universals. Consider two alternative assumptions. (1) Assume that if simultaneous instantiations of universals X and Y differ in their spatial relations with respect to another universal, then X is not identical to Y. There cannot be a case in which U is two feet from V and U is three feet from V, at the same time. Although this alternative assumption would stop the argument from starting, it means thinking of X and Y more like tropes than universals and is, hence, off limits to the proponent of the universals. (2) Assume that the spatial relations among universals mismatch those of the instantiating objects. For example, even if a red and a blue object are two feet apart, their colours may be a different distance apart, say eight feet. This alternative assumption, however, is both implausible and not necessarily helpful against this kind of argument. Consider that if there were such mismatching, we should expect to see a difference between the perceived distance between the colours of two objects and the perceived distance between those same objects, but we do not. More importantly this alternative assumption is compatible with a version of the argument. That is so since it is compatible with universal U's standing at the same time in varying distances to another universal V by way of different instantiations of U and a single instantiation of V, even if those varying spatial relations did not match, exactly or even at all, those of the instantiating objects. That is all that is needed for a version of this argument.
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
61449447164
-
-
I do not attempt here to assess these derivativist views. However, I offer two tentative points. First, I do not see a clear distinction between the Platonic view that denies spatial relations between universals altogether and the object-based derivativist view. Second, if we allow that there are spatial relations between universals in any sense, then it seems to me our perceptual experience grounds a presumption against the claim that these relations are derivative.
-
I do not attempt here to assess these derivativist views. However, I offer two tentative points. First, I do not see a clear distinction between the Platonic view that denies spatial relations between universals altogether and the object-based derivativist view. Second, if we allow that there are spatial relations between universals in any sense, then it seems to me our perceptual experience grounds a presumption against the claim that these relations are derivative.
-
-
-
-
3
-
-
61449433519
-
-
Charles Landesman, 'Introduction: The Problem of Universals', in his The Problem of Universals (New York: Basic Books, 1971), p. 6.
-
Charles Landesman, 'Introduction: The Problem of Universals', in his The Problem of Universals (New York: Basic Books, 1971), p. 6.
-
-
-
-
4
-
-
61449467975
-
-
For a discussion of the related problem of temporary intrinsics and responses to that problem that parallel the responses described below (except for the Trope view, see David Lewis, On the Plurality of Worlds Oxford: Blackwell, 1986, pp. 202-5
-
For a discussion of the related problem of temporary intrinsics and responses to that problem that parallel the responses described below (except for the Trope view), see David Lewis, On the Plurality of Worlds (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986), pp. 202-5.
-
-
-
-
5
-
-
60949136393
-
-
See my 'Lewis, Temporary Intrinsics, and Momentary Tropes', Analysis 57 (1997), pp. 254-8.
-
See my 'Lewis, Temporary Intrinsics, and Momentary Tropes', Analysis 57 (1997), pp. 254-8.
-
-
-
-
6
-
-
61449426520
-
-
It is worth pointing out that the Spatial Parts view can easily handle the North Pole-South Pole case. According to Spatial Parts view, universals have spatial parts. The North-Pole-located U is a distinct spatial part of a whole that includes our South-Pole-located U. The North-Pole-located U is north of the South-Pole-located V, and South-Pole-located U is not north of the North-Pole-located V. But, as already indicated, the difficulty is that this view rejects U and V as universals
-
It is worth pointing out that the Spatial Parts view can easily handle the North Pole-South Pole case. According to Spatial Parts view, universals have spatial parts. The North-Pole-located U is a distinct spatial part of a whole that includes our South-Pole-located U. The North-Pole-located U is north of the South-Pole-located V, and South-Pole-located U is not north of the North-Pole-located V. But, as already indicated, the difficulty is that this view rejects U and V as universals.
-
-
-
-
7
-
-
61449280653
-
-
It is notable that the problem of local external relations is not just the issue of simultaneous multiple locations. There are two reasons why this is so. First, the problem of local spatial relations does not automatically arise if universals have multiple locations. If universals have (multiple) locations non-derivatively, but only derivatively spatial relations, no such problem arises, as indicated earlier. Second, there are solutions to the problem of multiple location that are not solutions to the problem of local external relations. For example, if the 'having' relation has an additional argument place for locations, then any appearance of incompatibility arising simply from having multiple locations is eliminated: U has-at-L the location L and U has-at-L' the location L, But the same strategy did not work for the problem of local external relations in all of its guises
-
It is notable that the problem of local external relations is not just the issue of simultaneous multiple locations. There are two reasons why this is so. First, the problem of local spatial relations does not automatically arise if universals have multiple locations. If universals have (multiple) locations non-derivatively, but only derivatively spatial relations, no such problem arises, as indicated earlier. Second, there are solutions to the problem of multiple location that are not solutions to the problem of local external relations. For example, if the 'having' relation has an additional argument place for locations, then any appearance of incompatibility arising simply from having multiple locations is eliminated: U has-at-L the location L and U has-at-L' the location L'. But the same strategy did not work for the problem of local external relations in all of its guises.
-
-
-
-
8
-
-
61449559085
-
-
I would like to thank Mark Heller for his useful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. I would also like to thank the referees of this journal for their helpful suggestions
-
I would like to thank Mark Heller for his useful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. I would also like to thank the referees of this journal for their helpful suggestions.
-
-
-
|
