Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Consul wrote: July 6th, 2019, 11:27 am
The beetroot is the object."[/i]
(p. 13)
I find these excerpts interesting and well-written, but I am wondering if you present them as ideas that you yourself believe or are you just presenting someone else's ideas. Are we reading what are your ideas also? I of course as you know do not have the same beliefs as that author, but I can appreciate his attempt to do metaphysics. I am wondering how he analyzes a thought.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by Consul »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: July 6th, 2019, 4:53 pmI find these excerpts interesting and well-written, but I am wondering if you present them as ideas that you yourself believe or are you just presenting someone else's ideas. Are we reading what are your ideas also?
Yes, I agree with Heil.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Consul wrote: July 6th, 2019, 5:11 pm
GaryLouisSmith wrote: July 6th, 2019, 4:53 pmI find these excerpts interesting and well-written, but I am wondering if you present them as ideas that you yourself believe or are you just presenting someone else's ideas. Are we reading what are your ideas also?
Yes, I agree with Heil.
And thought? What is a thought? Say the thought, "I'm out of peanut butter.".
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by Consul »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: July 6th, 2019, 4:53 pmI am wondering how [John Heil] analyzes a thought.
His (excellent) book The Universe As We Find It contains a chapter on conscious thought. Here are some excerpts:

"What I would like to call attention to is a tendency among philosophers to conflate thinking and materials used in thinking. We sometimes think 'in language', soliloquizing privately. On other occasions, we reflect non-linguistically. Some philosophers distinguish these, describing the first as 'propositional' or 'sentential', the second as 'imagistic'. But both kinds of thinking are imagistic: we deploy visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile, and kinesthetic images. Some of this imagery is linguistic, verbal. Verbal imagery can be auditory (as when you 'hear' utterances in your head), kinesthetic (you 'feel' yourself uttering sentences), or a combination of these. Some cognizers can visualize inscriptions, mentally 'sign', and 'feel' embossed letters or Braille sequences. The point to appreciate is that verbal imagery is no less 'imagistic' than imagery of other sorts."
(pp. 251-2)

"Thinking—conscious thinking—is not merely the having or entertaining of images, verbal or otherwise. Thinking is a matter of an agent's using such images, putting them to work, And whatever it is to put images to work, it is not solely a matter of entertaining further images. Nor is conscious thinking something occurring behind the scenes when you deploy representations: it is the deployment of those representations—in your head or otherwise."
(p. 252)

"Inner utterances…are a species of mental imagery, where the images are images of what their audible, visual, or tactile counterparts sound, look, or feel like. There is no logical or conceptual gulf between linguistic ('propositional') imagery and imagery of other sorts, 'pictorial' imagery. Conscious thought quite generally is imagistic.
Not all thoughts incorporate linguistic imagery, however. Much of our thought involves non-linguistic visual, auditory, tactile, or olfactory imagery. Indeed, your thought about a particular person might include verbal imagery (an inner utterance of a name, for instance) accompanied by a visual image of the person and perhaps other imagery as well.
The association of imagery with thought is not a matter of identifying thought with images. Thinking is a matter of using imagery. …Without use, images or signs are empty; severed from use, representations fail to represent."

(p. 266)

"[C]onscious thinking is inevitably imagistic; to entertain a thought consciously is to deploy images of one sort or another. Imagery can be 'pictorial' or 'sentential'.You can imagine how something looks (did look, will look, or might look), feels (did feel, will feel, or might feel), tastes (did, will, or might tasts), sounds (did, will, or might sound), or smells (did, will, or might smell). One species of such imagining is verbal: you imaginatively utter, or hear, or feel yourself uttering, words."
(pp. 267-8)

"[T]he key to understanding the nature of thought is the recognition that thinking is something agents do with imagery. Thinking is not the having or entertaining of images, the mere occurrence of imagery, sentebtial or otherwise. Thinking is something done imagistically."
(p. 269)

"[O]rdinary conscious thought is best understood as the manipulation of images for various purposes."
(p. 271)

(Heil, John. The Universe As We Find It. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.)
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Consul wrote: July 6th, 2019, 5:18 pm

"[O]rdinary conscious thought is best understood as the manipulation of images for various purposes."
I still don't get it. As I understand him, he is saying thought is the use we make of a silently uttered sentence or other image. It is that image or sentence used for a purpose. To me, that still leaves unanswered the question of what a thought is.
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by Felix »

Gary, these guys think ( :? ) that because they can only think in words, this is also true for everyone else, a text-book example (pun intended) of conceptual blindness.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by Consul »

Felix wrote: July 6th, 2019, 6:04 pm Gary, these guys think ( :? ) that because they can only think in words, this is also true for everyone else, a text-book example (pun intended) of conceptual blindness.
You're wrong!

"Conscious thought quite generally is imagistic. Not all thoughts incorporate linguistic imagery, however. Much of our thought involves non-linguistic visual, auditory, tactile, or olfactory imagery."

(Heil, John. The Universe As We Find It. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. p. 266)

And see what I wrote: viewtopic.php?p=333416#p333416
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Consul wrote: July 6th, 2019, 6:29 pm
Felix wrote: July 6th, 2019, 6:04 pm Gary, these guys think ( :? ) that because they can only think in words, this is also true for everyone else, a text-book example (pun intended) of conceptual blindness.
You're wrong!

"Conscious thought quite generally is imagistic. Not all thoughts incorporate linguistic imagery, however. Much of our thought involves non-linguistic visual, auditory, tactile, or olfactory imagery."

(Heil, John. The Universe As We Find It. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. p. 266)

And see what I wrote: viewtopic.php?p=333416#p333416
I think a thought is a simple universal. In this case, the thought <I am out of peanut butter.>. And as a universal it is timeless and placeless. It can be or is exemplified by many different bare particulars, by many different individual minds. The thought is tied to a fact. In this case the fact that I am out of peanut butter. That tie is the nexus of intentionality. Furthermore, I remind you that a nexus (exemplification or intentionality) exists external to what it connects. Thoughts as universals, bare particulars, the various nexus, facts, and all the other ontological things are eternal things. They just are and they are - it hardly needs to be said - not dependent on anything temporal or spatial for their existence.

The simplicity of a thought is similar to Kant's idea of the transcendental unity of consciousness.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by Consul »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: July 6th, 2019, 8:34 pmI think a thought is a simple universal. In this case, the thought <I am out of peanut butter.>. And as a universal it is timeless and placeless. It can be or is exemplified by many different bare particulars, by many different individual minds. The thought is tied to a fact. In this case the fact that I am out of peanut butter. That tie is the nexus of intentionality. Furthermore, I remind you that a nexus (exemplification or intentionality) exists external to what it connects. Thoughts as universals, bare particulars, the various nexus, facts, and all the other ontological things are eternal things. They just are and they are - it hardly needs to be said - not dependent on anything temporal or spatial for their existence.
The simplicity of a thought is similar to Kant's idea of the transcendental unity of consciousness.
I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Thought = Fregan thought = (abstract) proposition?
Well, a mental thought qua act of thinking surely isn't "timeless and placeless".

Anyway, propositions as abstract sentence-meanings aren't universals but (abstract) objects. They are multiply expressible by different sentences (in different languages), but they are not multiply exemplifiable by particulars. And given that the sentences expressing them are complex, structured objects, I fail to see how the propositions expressed by them can be simple, partless objects.

As for this: "The thought is tied to a fact. …That tie is the nexus of intentionality."

Not all propositions represent facts, i.e. actual, obtaining states of affairs; but you may say that they all represent and refer to ("intend") states of affairs. But I think nonactual, non-obtaining states of affairs are ontological monstrosities. Moreover, you seem to regard both propositions and states of affairs (including facts) as abstract, non-spatiotemporal entities; but then there is no categorial difference between them anymore, in which case their "nexus" isn't intentionality (representationality or referentiality) but identity.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Consul wrote: July 6th, 2019, 9:55 pm

I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Thought = Fregan thought = (abstract) proposition?
Well, a mental thought qua act of thinking surely isn't "timeless and placeless".

Anyway, propositions as abstract sentence-meanings aren't universals but (abstract) objects. They are multiply expressible by different sentences (in different languages), but they are not multiply exemplifiable by particulars. And given that the sentences expressing them are complex, structured objects, I fail to see how the propositions expressed by them can be simple, partless objects.

As for this: "The thought is tied to a fact. …That tie is the nexus of intentionality."

Not all propositions represent facts, i.e. actual, obtaining states of affairs; but you may say that they all represent and refer to ("intend") states of affairs. But I think nonactual, non-obtaining states of affairs are ontological monstrosities. Moreover, you seem to regard both propositions and states of affairs (including facts) as abstract, non-spatiotemporal entities; but then there is no categorial difference between them anymore, in which case their "nexus" isn't intentionality (representationality or referentiality) but identity.
A "mental thought qua act" is a fact, i.e. a complex. The thought is the universal "in" the act, along with a bare particular and a nexus. Yes, a thought as I use the word is, I think, the same as ein Gedanke of Frege and almost the same as Russell's proposition. It is Bergmann's thought. Universals are abstract, why not? And Yes, some thoughts intend potential facts. I am not an actualist like you.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by Consul »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: July 6th, 2019, 10:08 pmYes, a thought as I use the word is, I think, the same as ein Gedanke of Frege and almost the same as Russell's proposition.
That's incoherent, because abstract Fregean propositions (qua sentence-meanings/-senses) are quite different from Russellian propositions, which are concrete states of affairs or (non-Fregean) facts.

See: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prop ... -singular/
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Consul wrote: July 6th, 2019, 10:23 pm
GaryLouisSmith wrote: July 6th, 2019, 10:08 pmYes, a thought as I use the word is, I think, the same as ein Gedanke of Frege and almost the same as Russell's proposition.
That's incoherent, because abstract Fregean propositions (qua sentence-meanings/-senses) are quite different from Russellian propositions, which are concrete states of affairs or (non-Fregean) facts.

See: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prop ... -singular/
I'll take your word for it. I am not a historian of philosophy. I do think, however, that I am presenting what Bergmann called a thought.
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

Consul wrote: July 6th, 2019, 9:55 pm
nonactual, non-obtaining states of affairs are ontological monstrosities.
MONSTROSITIES I love it. Yes, a Supernatural Bestiary. If you remember I said that the fundamental divide is between the ordinary, everyday world and the very separate World (or unworld) of Ontological Things. I am dealing in the Paranormal. In the Monstrum, a divine omen. In the Real, beyond the merely real.
GaryLouisSmith
Posts: 1135
Joined: June 2nd, 2019, 2:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gustav Bergmann
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Contact:

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by GaryLouisSmith »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: July 6th, 2019, 10:32 pm
Consul wrote: July 6th, 2019, 10:23 pm

That's incoherent, because abstract Fregean propositions (qua sentence-meanings/-senses) are quite different from Russellian propositions, which are concrete states of affairs or (non-Fregean) facts.

See: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prop ... -singular/
I'll take your word for it. I am not a historian of philosophy. I do think, however, that I am presenting what Bergmann called a thought.
Why did Bergmann write in that impossible style? I think it has a literary quality to it. Like the impossible to understand Symbolists. Like the modern poets, such as Hart Crane. Plus, I think it hides a secret sexual something. Maybe it was the war that made him strange. His attempt to appear one with science was an act. From Wikipedia for Symbolism - an artistic and poetic movement or style using symbolic images and indirect suggestion to express mystical ideas, emotions, and states of mind. It originated in late 19th-century France and Belgium, with important figures including Mallarmé, Maeterlinck, Verlaine, Rimbaud, and Redon.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Are you a Realist or a Nominalist?

Post by Consul »

GaryLouisSmith wrote: July 6th, 2019, 10:32 pmI do think, however, that I am presenting what Bergmann called a thought.
What's his definition of "thought"?
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021