Abstract
AbstractPeacocke’s recent The Primacy of Metaphysics covers a wide range of topics. This critical discussion focuses on the book’s novel account of extensive magnitudes and numbers. First, I further develop and defend Peacocke’s argument against nominalistic approaches to magnitudes and numbers. Then, I argue that his view is more Aristotelian than Platonist because reified magnitudes and numbers are accounted for via corresponding properties and these properties’ application conditions, and because the mentioned objects have a “shallow nature” relative to the corresponding properties. The result is an asymmetric conception of abstraction, which contrasts with the neo-Fregeans’ but has important tenets in common with an approach that I have recently developed.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference20 articles.
1. Boolos, G. (1984). To be is to be a value of a variable (or to be some values of some variables). Journal of Philosophy, 81(8), 430–449.
2. Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Field, H. (1989). Realism, mathematics, and modality. Oxford: Blackwell.
4. Frege, G. (1953). Foundations of Arithmetic (J. L. Austin, Trans.). Blackwell, Oxford.
5. Hale, B., & Wright, C. (2001a). Reason’s proper study. Oxford: Clarendon.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Carnap and the a priori;European Journal of Philosophy;2023-09-26