Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"The failure of nominalism"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "The failure of nominalism"

    Don´t take me as necessarily endorsing the argument presented here, though I´m sympathetic. But I want to have some ideas, as to how far into metaphysics does physics reach? I get the idea that there has to be a universal for electrons, since we know that every electron necessarily has to have the same property, but does that count as an argument against nominalism? Why? Why not?

    http://www.quantum-thomist.co.uk/my-...rst=38&last=38

  • #2
    Originally posted by Kwlsk View Post
    Don´t take me as necessarily endorsing the argument presented here, though I´m sympathetic. But I want to have some ideas, as to how far into metaphysics does physics reach? I get the idea that there has to be a universal for electrons, since we know that every electron necessarily has to have the same property, but does that count as an argument against nominalism? Why? Why not?

    http://www.quantum-thomist.co.uk/my-...rst=38&last=38
    I read that article awhile back. Would have to re-read again though. Wouldn't the admittance of universals for at least electrons render a strict nominalism false? For surely if nominalism is the denial that there really are universals in nature that we can abstract, then a universal for electrons would be enough to show its falsity.

    Comment


    • #3
      Kwlsk

      It counts as an argument against nominalism. If nominalism were true, then there wouldn't be any such thing as the "universal electron" by definition.

      Comment

      Working...
      X