aletheist

It seems to me that the whole concept of numerical identity only applies to determinate individuals. Hence we can say that no two actual points on a t...

We are not discussing "the source of telos in natural things," we are discussing what that telos is itself. While I am a theist, it seems problematic ...

No, the potential points are continuous with the actual points. That is why I had such a hard time with both of the options that you presented. Howeve...

The logical relationship between a general property and its individual instantiations is the same as that between a truly continuous line and the disc...

This is a Philosophy Forum, not a theology forum. You are effectively conceding that there are no final causes apart from willing agents, which - as I...

The logical relationship of what, exactly? And why do I have to answer your question before you address mine?

A seed in the ground or a ball at the top of an incline does not have any intentions, yet each has a final cause - the full-grown plant and coming to ...

I honestly have no desire to "haggle," but if "we accept that properties have ontogeneral status," are we adopting realism and rejecting nominalism? I...

I am suggesting that both of these statements are correct, but "there are" means two different things. Properties only exist in particulars, but prope...

Thanks, that was indeed a good read.

Reading Paul Forster's book, Peirce and the Threat of Nominalism - thanks to for bringing it to my attention - is helping me to get a better handle on...

This whole line of discussion began because asserted that "the cause is necessarily prior (temporally) to the effect," and then challenged anyone who ...

Would it make sense for any baseball team (even the Cubs) to announce today that its goal, intention, or purpose is to win the 2016 World Series? If n...

That is not how it works. Infinite possibilities do not entail that anything and everything is a real possibility. There are infinitely many possible ...

Indeed, "the" was an illustrative example that Peirce employed more than once in his writings. Before coming up with type/token, he used legisign/repl...

Yes, this brings to mind Peirce's use of "determination" in the sense of constraint. And this is reminiscent of his cosmogony, which begins with a con...

I have been reading stuff by and about Peirce for two solid years, and only recently started to feel like I was finally really getting it. I was warne...

Thanks, but that seems like a lot of material to digest. I am looking for a relatively concise and neutral summary of how the various terms are typica...

Which comes first in time, the end or the means? I am not referring to any thought about the end, or the desire for the end, or the decision to adopt ...

I still hesitate at this description, because I am contemplating the alternative that a universal (or a general) is not one single "item" exhibited by...

See, I understand universal and general on the one hand as being opposed to particular, singular, and individual on the other. That is why I keep aski...

Okay, but I have not been able to find anyone else who puts it that way.

I realize that, but I also know that you believe that there is only one kind of real entity. The whole debate is over whether there is at least one ot...

So far, I have yet to find a realist who affirms (in so many words) that universals are singularities; just William of Ockham, the arch-nominalist. I ...

As far as I can tell, you are just restating your nominalist position, which is not helpful. My understanding is that a realist would say that a unive...

Thanks, but it looks like Armstrong never uses the term "singular," and only mentions "general" and "individual" a handful of times. I am still wonder...

That is not my current understanding, although I am trying to do some reading up on this whole topic. Can you (or anyone else) suggest a good resource...

It is hard for me to think this because it is contradictory, at least as I currently understand the two terms. That which is general - including all p...

I do believe in immaterial causes, such as the free will, so that prejudice is not an issue for me. Nevertheless, it seems incontrovertible that the e...

I am talking about the process that produces snowflakes. How can it be singular if it is the same everywhere? How can "a bunch of dust particles float...

But what explains the surprising fact that those (supposedly singular) processes are the same for all soap bubbles and snowflakes?

No, it means "that for the sake of which the hammer comes into existence." Good advice - for both of us. It depends on exactly what you mean by "purpo...

Would you mind unpacking this a bit more? What does it mean for universals to explain? What does it mean for universals to be explained? On what basis...

, As I understand it, everything is a particular to a physicalist, because the only mode of being is actual existence.

I have suggested that driving nails is the final cause of the hammer, the end for the sake of which the hammer exists, which is subsequent to the maki...

I gather that those are considered particular properties that each individual thing has, not universal properties that multiple things have.

I am not a physicalist, so I can only continue to speculate. My guess is that mass-energy is not considered a (universal) property in the same way tha...

As I understand it, a physicalist would say that those terms denote concepts, which are nothing more than (physical) brain states.

Sorry, I meant matter in the broad modern sense that includes energy and space-time. The point is that the physicalist denies the reality of non-mater...

This is precisely what a (conventional) physicalist denies. You are imposing either Platonism or Aristotelian hylomorphism, and then trying to shoehor...

When will he be healthy if he walks about right now? In the future - not instantaneously, and certainly not in the past. The final cause (being health...

Let's review the exchange, just for the record. You gave no indication of withdrawing your initial stipulation that m=-1. If a-b=0, then indeed x=0 fo...

The reason why I made the hammer was so that I could drive the nails. That future outcome - not my mere desire for it - is the final cause of the hamm...

Go back to the original equations, set m=-1, and see what happens. In this case, undefined simply means indeterminate, since any pair of values for x ...

I was not trying to "prove" anything. I was simply showing how both deductive logic and algebra are about the relations among the terms, not their con...

What is not so? Everything in my last post is undeniably true, unless you reject simple deductive logic and basic algebra. Who said anything about mea...

It makes absolutely no difference whether or how A and B are defined. If you believe that if A then B, and you believe A, then it is rational for you ...

You did not link your statement about "unprovable hypotheticals" to any particular post, so how am I supposed to discern the specific reference? I hav...

No one is suggesting an affirmative answer to this question. To what are you referring here as "unprovable hypotheticals"? What beliefs do you think y...

Not according to the scenario as presented; you are imposing an additional assumption. "Free money" presumably means no such (or any other) strings at...