Nominalistic Things: Have You Seen http://philrsss.anu.edu.au/~henry/RRnom.html?

  • Thread starter selfAdjoint
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation is about a battle between Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee. Tweedle-Dum says that Tweedle-Dee has ruined his new rattle, and then a monstrous crow flies by. The heroes forget about the battle and fly away.
  • #1
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,894
11
Has anyone seen http://philrsss.anu.edu.au/~henry/RRnom.html [Broken] ? Any comments?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yeah, why is a "dragon" less dubious than "July the 11th"?
 
  • #3
It's a satire on some modern philsophies (note the mention of Rorty), which have been discussed not to long ago on PF Philosophy.
 
  • #4
do you know this chap? seems fascinating *stares off dreamily into space*, i was just wondering as i am in canberra...




...




...and need to get married to be eligible for youth allowance!

actually it was interesting from a philosophical point of view, how is it a satire? ooh, i missed something...

Typical things which nominalists snort at the existence of are numbers, properties, states of affairs, the note C-sharp, propositions, classes, sets, and distances. Some take the further step of denying the existence of space and time. I certainly do.

isn't calling a certain wavelength of vibration a C sharp just like calling a certain 'assembly' of cells a tree? i spose saying C sharp describes the properties of something real and tangible, like saying green describes one property of the real and tangible tree? am i on the right track? ah it's nice to disprove your own musings.

p.S: i was kidding about the getting married thing, well, it's true about the youth allowance... but yes, kidding... mmm
 
  • #5
Sarcasm is never pretty. Its existence around this issue highlights the absurdity of assuming intellectual stances such as nominalism and realism. Plato with his realistic ethics, burned all of Democritus' books while today Rorty criticizes realists. The simple truth is all of logic and philosophy is founded upon absurdity.

Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee,
Resolved to have a battle,
For Tweedle-Dum said Tweedle-Dee,
Had spoiled his nice new rattle.
Just then flew by a monstrous crow,
As big as a tar barrel,
Which frightened both the heroes so,
They quite forgot the battle.
 

1. What are nominalistic things?

Nominalistic things refer to abstract concepts or ideas that do not have a physical existence in the world. They exist only in our minds and are dependent on language and human understanding.

2. Why is the website http://philrsss.anu.edu.au/~henry/RRnom.html important for understanding nominalistic things?

The website is important because it provides a comprehensive list of resources and information about nominalism, including various arguments and theories about its nature and existence. It also includes critiques and responses to common objections.

3. Who is the author of http://philrsss.anu.edu.au/~henry/RRnom.html?

The author of the website is Peter van Inwagen, a prominent philosopher and professor at the University of Notre Dame. He is known for his work on metaphysics, free will, and philosophy of religion.

4. Can nominalistic things be proven or disproven?

Nominalistic things cannot be proven or disproven in the same way that physical objects can be. They are abstract concepts and do not have a physical presence that can be observed or measured. However, philosophers and scientists may use logical arguments and evidence to support or refute the existence of certain nominalistic things.

5. How does nominalism differ from other philosophical theories?

Nominalism differs from other philosophical theories, such as realism and conceptualism, in its rejection of the existence of abstract objects. Nominalists argue that these objects are merely a product of human language and understanding, rather than having an independent existence. This is in contrast to realists who believe that abstract objects have a real existence outside of human perception, and conceptualists who hold that these objects exist but only as concepts in the mind.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
861
Replies
3
Views
726
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
684
  • General Discussion
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
4
Replies
138
Views
9K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top