Kontrollzentrum
WENN DER THREAD UNTER 2000 POSTS BLEIBT, KRIEGEN DIE USER FÜNF WÜNSCHE UND DER STAFF KEINEN!
WENN DER THREAD UNTER 2000 POSTS BLEIBT, KRIEGEN DIE USER FÜNF WÜNSCHE UND DER STAFF KEINEN!
As I aim for that bright white day
Conflict serum is my aura
It seems that life's so fragile
I guess I'll fly some other time
I lack from superhighway thoughts
Won't live as long as the city lights
Soaked by underwater times
Electric splash on a midnight drive
Wish I could rape the day,
just something radical
Lost the sense of sweet things
Who's gonna take me widely?
Guided by the pinball map
The driver, still unknown to me
Who was sent to glorify?
Before we injected this common pride
Sometimes I don't belong
Release me from your world
Pacified by the small things in life
I wait for earthquakes to rearrange
Never been able to use the force
I only have it read to me
Despite all the misguided faith
(Maybe) I'll find a place in this mess
Early morning moments
A glimpse of joy
But soon it's over and I return to dust
As I try to be
Everything and everyone
I waste away
Wieso das denn? oOZitat von Alphashark
Weil ich genau so dreckig spielen kann die werten Kollegen Admins. ゞ(￣∇￣;)ｦｲｦｲ
Aber doch nicht UNS gegenüberWeil ich genau so dreckig spielen kann die werten Kollegen Admins. ゞ(￣∇￣ｦｲｦｲ
The problem of universals is an ancient problem in metaphysics about whether universals exist. Universals are general or abstract qualities, characteristics, properties, kinds or relations, such as being male/female, solid/liquid/gas or a certain colour[1], that can be predicated of individuals or particulars or that individuals or particulars can be regarded as sharing or participating in. For example, Meena, John and Poppy all have the quality of being human or humanity is the universal they have in common. While many standard cases of universals are also typically regarded as abstract objects (such as humanity), abstract objects are not necessarily universals. For example, in an article on nominalism by Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra, numbers can be held to be particular yet abstract objects.[2]
The problem of universals is about their status; as to whether universals exist independently of the individuals of whom they can be predicated or if they are merely convenient ways of talking about and finding similarity among particular things that are radically different. This has led philosophers to raise questions like, if they exist, do they exist in the individuals or only in people's minds or in some separate metaphysical domain? Questions like these arise from attempts to account for the phenomenon of similarity or attribute agreement among things.[3] For example, living grass and some apples are similar, namely in having the attribute of greenness. The issue, however, is how to account for this and related facts.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 Positions
o 1.1 Realism
o 1.2 Nominalism
* 2 Ancient thought
o 2.1 Plato
o 2.2 Aristotle
* 3 Medieval thought
o 3.1 Medieval nominalism
* 4 Modern thought
o 4.1 Berkeley
o 4.2 Mill
o 4.3 Peirce
o 4.4 James
* 5 Contemporary realisms
* 6 See also
* 7 Notes
* 8 References and further reading
* 9 External links
[edit] Positions
There are two main positions on the issue: realism and nominalism (sometimes simply called "anti-realism" in regards to universals).[4]
[edit] Realism
The realist school claims that universals are real — they exist and are distinct from the particulars that instantiate them. There are various forms of realism. Two major forms are Platonic realism (universalia ante rem) and Aristotelian realism (universalia in rebus).[5] Platonic realism is the view that universals are real entities and they exist independent of particulars. Aristotelian realism, on the other hand, is the view that universals are real entities, but their existence is dependent on the particulars that exemplify them. Realism has been endorsed by many, including Plato, Aristotle, and Bertrand Russell (1912).
Realists tend to argue that universals must be posited as distinct entities in order to account for various phenomena. For example, a common realist argument, arguably found in Plato, is that universals are required for certain general words to have meaning and for the sentences in which they occur to be true or false. Take the sentence "Djivan Gasparyan is a musician". The realist may claim that this sentence is only meaningful and expresses a truth because there is an individual, Djivan Gasparyan, who possesses a certain quality, musicianship. Thus it is assumed that the property is a universal which is distinct from the particular individual who has the property (MacLeod & Rubenstein, 2006, §1b).
[edit] Nominalism
Nominalists assert that only individuals or particulars exist and deny that universals are real (i.e. that they exist as entities or beings). The term "nominalism" comes from the Latin nomen ("name"). There are various forms of nominalism (which is sometimes also referred to as "terminism"), three major forms are resemblance nominalism, conceptualism and trope nominalism. Nominalism has been endorsed or defended by many, including William of Ockham, D. C. Williams (1953), David Lewis (1983) and arguably H. H. Price (1953) and W. V. O. Quine (1961).
Nominalists often argue for their view by claiming that realism has insurmountable problems. Another sort of argument for their view is that nominalism can account for all the relevant phenomena, so — by Ockham's razor or some sort of principle of simplicity — nominalism is preferable, since it posits less entity.
[edit] Ancient thought
[edit] Plato
Plato, at least during the first part of his life, believed there to be a sharp distinction between the world of perceivable objects and the world of universals or forms: one can only have mere opinions about the former, but one can have knowledge about the latter. For Plato it was not possible to have knowledge of anything that could change or was particular, since knowledge had to be forever unfailing and general.[6]. For that reason, the world of the forms is the real world, like sunlight, the sensible world is only imperfectly or partially real, like shadows. Plato, accordingly, took a realist position regarding universals. This Platonic realism, however, in denying full reality to the material world, differs sharply with modern forms of realism, which generally assert the reality of the external, physical world and which in some versions deny the reality of ideals.
One of the first nominalist critiques of Plato's realism was that of Diogenes of Sinope, who said "I've seen Plato's cups and table, but not his cupness and tableness."[7]
[edit] Aristotle
Plato's student Aristotle disagreed with his tutor. Aristotle transformed Plato's forms into "formal causes", the blueprints or essences of individual things. Whereas Plato idealized geometry, Aristotle emphasized biology and related disciplines and therefore much of his thinking concerns living beings and their properties. The nature of universals in Aristotle's philosophy therefore hinges on his view of natural kinds.
Consider for example a particular oak tree. This is a member of a species and it has much in common with other oak trees, past, present and future. Its universal, its oakness, is a part of it. A biologist can study oak trees and learn about oakness and more generally the intelligible order within the sensible world. Accordingly, Aristotle was more confident than Plato about coming to know the sensible world; he was a prototypical empiricist and a founder of induction. Aristotle was a new, moderate sort of realist about universals.
Bedank Dich bei gewissen Leuten im Staff. T.TAber doch nicht UNS gegenüber
Namen! Ich brauche Namen *Schläger auspack*
Mog, mq, Dragonlady, darkblue, Sumbriva. Bisher. Die Liste halte ich auf dem aktuellem Stand. 8)
*notiert*
Hrr hrr.
Na wo hat er das wohl gelernt? XWeil ich genau so dreckig spielen kann die werten Kollegen Admins. ゞ(￣∇￣
Der User, der hier den 2000. Post schreibt, der bekommt 50 Posts geschenkt!
"When I was in college, there were certain words you couldn't say in front of a girl," "Now you can say them, but you can't say 'girl." - Tom Lehrer
Nicht verlockend genug!
Kranker Shice.
Kann ich auch auf einen User wetten? ^^
Cool. *ins ACP latsch und selber schenk, weil Mog weg ist*
50 Posts mehr
...auch wenn jetzt die schöne fast-Gleichheit von Counter und reeller Postingzahl kaputt ist.
Will echt niemand Tetris spielen?
nö!Will echt niemand Tetris spielen?
Also das Wort 'Boner' scheint ja sehr vielen ins Auge zu stechen und bevor das hier noch wer falsch auffasst oder mit etwas falschem in Verbindung bringt: Das ist eine Chrakterart in Diablo II.
Student für Mehrsprachigkeit und interkulturelle Bildung -> Grundstudium 1. Semester = Psychologie... ich frage mich manchmal wirklich, wer an den Bildungsplänen für württembergische Unis hockt
WTF? Nagut, da gibts auch Gegner die Wutwicht oder Rotzschieber heißen
Berechtigungen
