Abstract

Douglas Ehring (2011) has proposed a conception of natural classes of tropes to fulfill the roles usually attributed to universals. Natural classes of tropes can avoid the difficulties that affect the classic theory of tropes – as claimed by D. C. Williams and Keith Campbell – where tropes are simple and, by themselves, are particulars and have an intrinsic nature. Natural classes of tropes are also preferable to primitive resemblance classes of tropes, because they can explain the characteristics of the relation of resemblance and can also ground an internal relation of resemblance between tropes. It is contended here that the conception proposed works very differently whether tropes are conceived as modifier tropes or as module tropes. In the first case, tropes cannot be grouped directly in natural classes, because tropes have no intrinsic character. They ground the character possessed by their bearer, but they themselves have none. So, the character attributed to a trope due to its belonging to a natural class is dependent, on its turn, on the natural classes or the resemblance classes into which the objects that bear those tropes enter. In the second case, tropes do have a character. Then, they can enter ‘directly’ into natural classes. The problem in this case, though, is that tropes seem to have many different characters and seem vulnerable to the traditional problems of the ‘imperfect community’ and the ‘company’ that affect resemblance nominalism. Keywords : properties, tropes, natural classes, resemblance classes, problem of the imperfect community, problem of the company.

Highlights

  • Resumo Douglas Ehring (2011) propôs uma concepção de classes naturais de tropos para cumprir as funções normalmente atribuídas a universais

  • One option is to get rid of tropes as character grounders completely. If they don’t fulfill any useful theoretical function, why postulate them? Another option is to reject that the ‘intrinsic nature’ of a trope comes from the fact that objects that bear those tropes pertain to certain natural classes or resemble such and such other objects

  • There is an important difference in the situation when it comes to natural classes of module tropes or resemblance classes of module tropes – as the case might be

Read more

Summary

Advantages of natural classes of tropes

The classical theory sustains that tropes are simple entities that, at the same time, are particular and have an intrinsic nature. Imperfect resemblance is an internal relation in the classical conception of tropes These tropes perfectly resemble each other in respect to being particulars. There is a theoretical motivation for endorsing either external resemblance classes of tropes or natural classes of tropes This is coherent with a general conception where there are no universal entities that can be multiply instantiated. (b) The formal characteristics of the relation of resemblance need not be something brute and primitive They can be derived from the fact that tropes belong to different natural classes Ehring contends that it can be shown that the relation of perfect resemblance is reflexive, symmetric and transitive, while the relation of imperfect resemblance can be shown to be reflexive, symmetric and non-transitive

Natural classes of module tropes or modifier tropes?
Classes of modifier tropes
Classes of module tropes
Conclusions
José Tomás Alvarado
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call