How is William James pragmatic method related to the nominalism,utilitarainism , and positivism?
Q. How is William James pragmatic method related to the nominalism,utilitarainism , and positivism?
Asked by lost11011989 - Sun Mar 23 11:00:31 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Answer in two words or less.
Answered by Jorth - Sun Mar 23 11:04:50 2008
Q. How is William James pragmatic method related to the nominalism,utilitarainism , and positivism?
Asked by lost11011989 - Sun Mar 23 11:00:31 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Answer in two words or less.
Answered by Jorth - Sun Mar 23 11:04:50 2008
What is conceptualism?And realism?And Nominalism?
Q. Someone please explain?
Asked by I LOVE THE ZIONIST ENTITY - Wed Dec 24 15:09:16 2008 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Conceptualism - The view that concepts are fundamental and are what we use to understand the world. Realism - The view that what we see is what there is. Our minds are not a virtual reality. Nonimalism - The view that what is fundamental is a logical structure that can be determined from the way language (or concepts) and the world relate.
Answered by Law Man - Wed Dec 24 15:27:31 2008
Q. Someone please explain?
Asked by I LOVE THE ZIONIST ENTITY - Wed Dec 24 15:09:16 2008 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Conceptualism - The view that concepts are fundamental and are what we use to understand the world. Realism - The view that what we see is what there is. Our minds are not a virtual reality. Nonimalism - The view that what is fundamental is a logical structure that can be determined from the way language (or concepts) and the world relate.
Answered by Law Man - Wed Dec 24 15:27:31 2008
What is 'nominalism'?
Q. remy-would Russell's theory from On Denotation be considered a form of nominalism?
Asked by Cupcake - Tue Mar 20 12:15:03 2007 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Words express a universal which can be found in the thing itself. For example man is a rational animal, every man represent the possibility of being a rational animal and this is his essence (everyone having the potentiality of being a rational animal is a man). For nominalists essences do not exists, they are only a label decided by man, therefore you can decide to call a category of people men and exclude another. The problem with nominalism arises when they have to explain what is a similarity, since for them essence does not exist. How can you say this man is similar to another, when the word indicating man is only a convention and has no concept behind inherent to a reality? Hope this is of help. --- As far as I know (and remember… [cont.]
Answered by remy - Tue Mar 20 12:48:07 2007
Q. remy-would Russell's theory from On Denotation be considered a form of nominalism?
Asked by Cupcake - Tue Mar 20 12:15:03 2007 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Words express a universal which can be found in the thing itself. For example man is a rational animal, every man represent the possibility of being a rational animal and this is his essence (everyone having the potentiality of being a rational animal is a man). For nominalists essences do not exists, they are only a label decided by man, therefore you can decide to call a category of people men and exclude another. The problem with nominalism arises when they have to explain what is a similarity, since for them essence does not exist. How can you say this man is similar to another, when the word indicating man is only a convention and has no concept behind inherent to a reality? Hope this is of help. --- As far as I know (and remember… [cont.]
Answered by remy - Tue Mar 20 12:48:07 2007
Can anyone give me an example of something that nominalist?
Q. I'm having a wee bit of trouble understanding nominalism...
Asked by Miss D - Wed Oct 8 16:52:39 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. There are a bunch of similar positions that can all be called "nominalism" in one form or another, but the gist of it is this: nominalists believe that abstract notions exist only insofar as the names we give them. For an example, take the word "virtue". Plato would argue (and he does in the Meno) that there is a "universal" form of virtue, and that all instances of virtue that we witness are particular manifestations of that universal. A nominalist, like Hume, would argue that given these various instances of things that we refer to as virtuous, we derive a general term called "virtue", but it has no metaphysical significance beyond that. Something to help you remember: "nominalism" is derived from the Latin "nomen" which means "name".
Answered by wiki.wiki22 - Wed Oct 8 17:20:28 2008
Q. I'm having a wee bit of trouble understanding nominalism...
Asked by Miss D - Wed Oct 8 16:52:39 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. There are a bunch of similar positions that can all be called "nominalism" in one form or another, but the gist of it is this: nominalists believe that abstract notions exist only insofar as the names we give them. For an example, take the word "virtue". Plato would argue (and he does in the Meno) that there is a "universal" form of virtue, and that all instances of virtue that we witness are particular manifestations of that universal. A nominalist, like Hume, would argue that given these various instances of things that we refer to as virtuous, we derive a general term called "virtue", but it has no metaphysical significance beyond that. Something to help you remember: "nominalism" is derived from the Latin "nomen" which means "name".
Answered by wiki.wiki22 - Wed Oct 8 17:20:28 2008
Abstraction?
Q. Can anyone explain the term abstraction in a philisophical sense in relation to nominalism, please? Serious answers on please, thanks or in relation to universals..
Asked by pseudoname - Mon Dec 11 12:54:24 2006 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Nominalism There is a tradition in philosophy called nominalism which rejects the existence of all abstract entities. Nominalists face perhaps their biggest difficulty in accounting for the successful application of mathematics. One form of nominalism is formalism which is the doctrine that mathematics is nothing more than the manipulation of symbols according to certain rules. A version of this view was first propounded by the great mathematician of the early twentieth century David Hilbert. Formalism avoids many problems faced by platonism but leaves us with the question of why anyone would bother to do mathematics or find it useful. Hilbert s programme was devastated by Goedel s incompleteness theorems but an answer to this question… [cont.]
Answered by Karma Chimera - Tue Dec 12 06:40:35 2006
Q. Can anyone explain the term abstraction in a philisophical sense in relation to nominalism, please? Serious answers on please, thanks or in relation to universals..
Asked by pseudoname - Mon Dec 11 12:54:24 2006 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Nominalism There is a tradition in philosophy called nominalism which rejects the existence of all abstract entities. Nominalists face perhaps their biggest difficulty in accounting for the successful application of mathematics. One form of nominalism is formalism which is the doctrine that mathematics is nothing more than the manipulation of symbols according to certain rules. A version of this view was first propounded by the great mathematician of the early twentieth century David Hilbert. Formalism avoids many problems faced by platonism but leaves us with the question of why anyone would bother to do mathematics or find it useful. Hilbert s programme was devastated by Goedel s incompleteness theorems but an answer to this question… [cont.]
Answered by Karma Chimera - Tue Dec 12 06:40:35 2006
Protestants, do you...?
Q. ...hold to Nominalism? The reason I ask is because the philosophy of Nominalism, developed in the Academies of the High Middle Ages, formed the epistemological and ontological thought of the earliest Protestants (e.g., Luther, Calvin, Zwingli). Regardless of your answer, what are your thoughts on Classical Realism?
Asked by delsydebothom - Wed Feb 27 13:58:36 2008 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. From Wiki: Nominalism arose in reaction to the problem of universals. Specifically, accounting for the fact that some things are of the same type. For example, Fluffy and Kitzler are both cats, or, the fact that certain properties are repeatable, such as: the grass, the shirt, and Kermit the Frog are green. One wants to know in virtue of what are Fluffy and Kitzler both cats, and what makes the grass, the shirt, and Kermit green. The realist answer is that all the green things are green in virtue of the existence of a universal; a single abstract thing, in this case, that is a part of all the green things. With respect to the colour of the grass, the shirt and Kermit, one of their parts is identical. In this respect, the three parts are… [cont.]
Answered by Bruce - Wed Feb 27 15:29:45 2008
Q. ...hold to Nominalism? The reason I ask is because the philosophy of Nominalism, developed in the Academies of the High Middle Ages, formed the epistemological and ontological thought of the earliest Protestants (e.g., Luther, Calvin, Zwingli). Regardless of your answer, what are your thoughts on Classical Realism?
Asked by delsydebothom - Wed Feb 27 13:58:36 2008 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. From Wiki: Nominalism arose in reaction to the problem of universals. Specifically, accounting for the fact that some things are of the same type. For example, Fluffy and Kitzler are both cats, or, the fact that certain properties are repeatable, such as: the grass, the shirt, and Kermit the Frog are green. One wants to know in virtue of what are Fluffy and Kitzler both cats, and what makes the grass, the shirt, and Kermit green. The realist answer is that all the green things are green in virtue of the existence of a universal; a single abstract thing, in this case, that is a part of all the green things. With respect to the colour of the grass, the shirt and Kermit, one of their parts is identical. In this respect, the three parts are… [cont.]
Answered by Bruce - Wed Feb 27 15:29:45 2008
How are mathematical proposition's true - what doctrine do you assent to?
Q. Mathematicians have their views on mathematical entities and the truthmaker's of mathematical propositions: Many adopt one of the four prevailing views - 1. Mathematical realism (also known as 'Mathematical Platonism'), 2. Mathematical Fictionalism, 3. Logicism, or 4. Nominalism. Mathematical realism thesis is that what makes a mathematical proposition true is that the proposition is corresponding to a mathematical world. So roughly, '1+1=2' is true if and only if there is an entity 'x', such that 'x is 1' is true and so forth. The thesis depends on the existence on mathematical entities, which by their very nature (it is presumed often) have no spatio-temporal location and are thereby nonphysical. Fictionalism denies the existence of… [cont.]
Asked by mynameischristo - Fri May 16 03:24:22 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I subscribe to the pragmatic theory of truth, which basically says "if it works, it's true". Our entire world functions with math as its backbone, to count money, to tell time, to make your computer work, etc. Since the world isn't falling apart, we can conclude pretty confidently that math works, and therefore it is true. Whether this truth has any foundation in reality is not important.
Answered by Letao12 - Fri May 16 19:07:29 2008
Q. Mathematicians have their views on mathematical entities and the truthmaker's of mathematical propositions: Many adopt one of the four prevailing views - 1. Mathematical realism (also known as 'Mathematical Platonism'), 2. Mathematical Fictionalism, 3. Logicism, or 4. Nominalism. Mathematical realism thesis is that what makes a mathematical proposition true is that the proposition is corresponding to a mathematical world. So roughly, '1+1=2' is true if and only if there is an entity 'x', such that 'x is 1' is true and so forth. The thesis depends on the existence on mathematical entities, which by their very nature (it is presumed often) have no spatio-temporal location and are thereby nonphysical. Fictionalism denies the existence of… [cont.]
Asked by mynameischristo - Fri May 16 03:24:22 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I subscribe to the pragmatic theory of truth, which basically says "if it works, it's true". Our entire world functions with math as its backbone, to count money, to tell time, to make your computer work, etc. Since the world isn't falling apart, we can conclude pretty confidently that math works, and therefore it is true. Whether this truth has any foundation in reality is not important.
Answered by Letao12 - Fri May 16 19:07:29 2008
Atheists, regarding beginning of the universe...?
Q. I say "beginning" for lack of a better term. Now, the physical universe is made up of energy and matter, which I'm told are interchangeable. Not having the ability to do the experiments that led to that conclusion myself, I'll never really know if that's the case or not. Notwithstanding, I get the impression that atheists think that this "deposit" of energy and matter is, collectively, existence. Or rather, you believe that the predicate "existence" cannot exist apart from from its subject. This seems to make Atheism a particular species of Nominalism. Is this correct? The Dude...Nominalists believe that universals are simply names, and do not really exist. Thus, "horseness"--viz. the potency of an existing thing to be informed and limited… [cont.]
Asked by delsydebothom - Wed Feb 27 12:27:38 2008 - - 15 Answers - 0 Comments
A. it's big, it's really big... You know I was an atheist long before I heard of the big bang theory Perhaps you should address your questions to physicists
Answered by purple_kathryn_ni - Wed Feb 27 12:58:53 2008
Q. I say "beginning" for lack of a better term. Now, the physical universe is made up of energy and matter, which I'm told are interchangeable. Not having the ability to do the experiments that led to that conclusion myself, I'll never really know if that's the case or not. Notwithstanding, I get the impression that atheists think that this "deposit" of energy and matter is, collectively, existence. Or rather, you believe that the predicate "existence" cannot exist apart from from its subject. This seems to make Atheism a particular species of Nominalism. Is this correct? The Dude...Nominalists believe that universals are simply names, and do not really exist. Thus, "horseness"--viz. the potency of an existing thing to be informed and limited… [cont.]
Asked by delsydebothom - Wed Feb 27 12:27:38 2008 - - 15 Answers - 0 Comments
A. it's big, it's really big... You know I was an atheist long before I heard of the big bang theory Perhaps you should address your questions to physicists
Answered by purple_kathryn_ni - Wed Feb 27 12:58:53 2008
I need help with Plato, the "Parmenides", and Universals.?
Q. For those familiar with Universals, Plato, Realism/Nominalism. For my philosophy class I have to write a paper where I present some arguments against "Universals", I have read the dialogue "Parmenides" by Plato and found it somewhat difficult to fully understand(around midway towards the end I got a bit lost). I'm having problems specifically with the third-man argument, If someone can elaborate on this I will appreciate the help, but any further assistance would also be helpful. Thanx in advance.
Asked by Bellini - Fri Dec 12 22:03:21 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The argument of Parmenides beginning at the end of 131e, of the dialogue "Parmenides", is Parmenides's initial argument against Plato's, or Socrates's "forms", which all Greeks called "ideas", in their spoken and written language. The Greek word "idea" was named "forma" in Latin. So the terms "idea" and "form" end up being used interchangably in different English translations of Plato. Your expression "somewhat difficult to understand" is an understatement! The argument beginning at the end of 131e would more accurately be called a "third largeness argument", rather than the "3rd man" argument, which we owe to Aristotle's description of the argument, which runs like this:- There are particular men, such as Socrates, Plato and… [cont.]
Answered by unknown - Sun Dec 14 00:19:23 2008
Q. For those familiar with Universals, Plato, Realism/Nominalism. For my philosophy class I have to write a paper where I present some arguments against "Universals", I have read the dialogue "Parmenides" by Plato and found it somewhat difficult to fully understand(around midway towards the end I got a bit lost). I'm having problems specifically with the third-man argument, If someone can elaborate on this I will appreciate the help, but any further assistance would also be helpful. Thanx in advance.
Asked by Bellini - Fri Dec 12 22:03:21 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The argument of Parmenides beginning at the end of 131e, of the dialogue "Parmenides", is Parmenides's initial argument against Plato's, or Socrates's "forms", which all Greeks called "ideas", in their spoken and written language. The Greek word "idea" was named "forma" in Latin. So the terms "idea" and "form" end up being used interchangably in different English translations of Plato. Your expression "somewhat difficult to understand" is an understatement! The argument beginning at the end of 131e would more accurately be called a "third largeness argument", rather than the "3rd man" argument, which we owe to Aristotle's description of the argument, which runs like this:- There are particular men, such as Socrates, Plato and… [cont.]
Answered by unknown - Sun Dec 14 00:19:23 2008
what is nominalism?
Q. what is nominalism?
Asked by krystinamackinnon - Mon Mar 24 14:09:56 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. one of my favorite philosophical trends... but I'll be short... just follow this link
Answered by sophia - Mon Mar 24 14:21:47 2008
Q. what is nominalism?
Asked by krystinamackinnon - Mon Mar 24 14:09:56 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. one of my favorite philosophical trends... but I'll be short... just follow this link
Answered by sophia - Mon Mar 24 14:21:47 2008
From Yahoo Answer Search: 'nominalism'
Mon Nov 2 17:57:59 2009 [ refresh local cache ]
[Hide]▼
news.google.com
Christian Chronicle
Religious nominalism in Canada has merged with a rampant secularism. The Canadian establishment is a-Christian if not anti-Christian. ...
and more »
triumphpro.com
390px x 340px | 32.80kB
[source page]
migrated into Northwestern Europe Britain Ireland Australia and North America May God speed this day of reconciliation unity and shalom Ezek 37 15 28 Who Is William F Dankenbring
deepfreeze9.blogspot.com
Pierre de Vries
ue, 25 Aug 2009 23:03:01 GM
Spectrum . nominalism. . James Franklin's discussion of . nominalism. vs. realism on the Philosopher's Zone struck me as relevant to my obsession with spectrum as a concept. To be realist about some concept is to say that there is such a ...
[Hide]▲
