« Singular Concepts Again | Main | Berdyaev on the Moral Source of Atheism »

Thursday, September 23, 2021


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I have followed your posts about singular concepts with great interest. I would answer this particular question as follows: Because 'Vulcan' refers to an individual, distinct planet inside the orbit of Mercury that, per 1, does not exist. It is therefore a possible planet, not actual. 'Vulcan' no less than 'Socrates' is innately singular as this planet and no other, and does not become general just because you can refer to it as small anymore than Socrates becomes general because you can describe him as ugly. Similarly, I would argue that the fact that 'different individuals instantiate' in 'different possible worlds' does not make Vulcan or Socrates general. It just means that for them both, alternative possibilities are near infinite. Which is kind of the thing about possibilities, as opposed to actualities.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 10/2008



October 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Blog powered by Typepad