Dear Jason, I've published a paper which distinguishes between 'universals' as discussed in contemporary Australian metaphysics (most particularly in the work of D.M. Armstrong), and 'generals' as discussed by Peirce.
Here is the abstract: "This paper contrasts the scholastic realists of David Armstrong and Charles Peirce. It is argued that the so-called 'problem of universals' is not a problem in pure ontology (concerning whether universals exist) as Armstrong construes it to be. Rather, it extends to issues concerning which predicates should be applied where, issues which Armstrong sets aside under the label of 'semantics', and which from a Peircean perspective encompass even the fundamentals of scientific methodology. It is argued that Peirce's scholastic realism not only presents a more nuanced ontology (distinguishing the existent front the real) but also provides more of a sense of why realism should be a position worth fighting for." If that sounds of interest, the link is here: http://hdl.handle.net/10289/2918 Cheers, Cathy And here is the abstract: The link On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Khadimir <khadi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings, > > I have a question for those knowledgeable and willing to answer a general > question for those more steeping in classical metaphysics and logic than I. > > What are the distinctions between claiming the reality of universals vs. > generals? How would one argue that universals are not merely merely > generals? By the latter, for example, I mean general concepts created > through a process of induction or what Locke called "abstraction." I offer > an example to indicate what I mean by generality, though the definition is > informal. I am familiar with Peirce's article on Berkeley, which I enjoy, > and I would look forward to Peircean and other views on the matter. > Citations and references with limited explanation would be a fine way to > answer, as I would not ask too much of anyone's time. > > Best and Thank You, > Jason Hills > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L > listserv. To remove yourself from this list, send a message to > lists...@listserv.iupui.edu with the line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of > the message. To post a message to the list, send it to > PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L listserv. To remove yourself from this list, send a message to lists...@listserv.iupui.edu with the line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of the message. To post a message to the list, send it to PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
