Abstract
To be an Aristotelian about universals is to hold that universals depend for their existence on their exemplifiers. An argument against Aristotelianism about universals has recently been put forward by Costa to the effect that a contradiction follows from assuming a certain formulation of Aristotelianism together with some highly plausible principles governing the notions employed in that formulation. In this paper, we provide different ways of articulating the Aristotelian position which, while being related with some of the main contributions in the current Aristotelian tradition, do not fall prey to the argument.
Highlights
To be an Aristotelian about universals is to hold that universals depend for their existence on their exemplifiers
The idea is to modify, slightly but crucially, the version of Aristotelianism attacked by Costa while maintaining that Aristotelianism about universals is concerned with grounding the existence of universals
It can be maintained that it is essential for a universal to be exemplified by something, i.e. that the fact that a universal is exemplified by something obtains in virtue of the very essence of that universal, or yet that the proposition that universal U is exemplified by something is true in virtue of the very essence of U. This way of formulating Aristotelianism about universals can be regimented by introducing a modality x meaning: it is the case in virtue of the essence of x that
Summary
To be an Aristotelian about universals is to hold that universals depend for their existence on their exemplifiers. The precise formulation of a consistent Aristotelian view of universals, is not an easy task, primarily due to the fact that the notion of ontological dependence involved in this view is far from being transparent. Costa has put forward an argument against Aristotelianism about universals by relying on one precise formulation of the Aristotelian thesis, according to which the existence of a universal is grounded in its being exemplified by something (Costa 2019). The argument, which has the merit of presenting a first precise formal formulation of the Aristotelian thesis, shows that this version of Aristotelianism about universals, together with some plausible principles about relations, exemplification
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
