Armstrong on thespatio-temporality of universals 1.

Provocatively, David Armstrong's properties are supposed to be both universals and spatio-temporal. What does this amount to? I consider four of Armstrong's views, in order of ascending plausibility: (1) the exemplification account, on which universals are exemplified by space-times; (2) the locatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Australasian Journal of Philosophy Vol. 84; no. 2; pp. 301 - 309
Autor principal: Magalhães, Ernâni
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Taylor & Francis Ltd Jun2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=21007398&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 21007398
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00048402
        BHK
      jtl: Australasian Journal of Philosophy
      issn: 00048402
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jun2006
      vid: 84
      iid: 2
      pid: 377
      pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd
    artinfo:
      ui:
        21007398
        10.1080/00048400600759209
      ppf: 301
      ppct: 8
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 92KB
      tig:
        atl: Armstrong on thespatio-temporality of universals 1.
      aug:
        au: Magalhães, Ernâni
        affil: West Virginia University
      su:
        Universals (Philosophy)
        Armstrong, David
        Spacetime
        Plausibility (Logic)
        Philosophy
      sug:
        subj:
          Universals (Philosophy)
          Armstrong, David
          Spacetime
          Plausibility (Logic)
          Philosophy
      ab: Provocatively, David Armstrong's properties are supposed to be both universals and spatio-temporal. What does this amount to? I consider four of Armstrong's views, in order of ascending plausibility: (1) the exemplification account, on which universals are exemplified by space-times; (2) the location account, on which universals are located at space-times; (3) the first constituent account, on which spatio-temporal relations are elements of what I call the form of time; and, the true view, (4) the second constituent account, on which universals are spatio-temporal only ‘derivatively’ by being constituents of states of affairs which are so ‘primarily’. The first two accounts are rejected because they entail that space-times must be substantival. In making plausible the second constituent account, I distinguish primitive and derivative spatio-temporality. Something is primitively spatio-temporal when it is at a space-time, or stands in spatio-temporal relations. Something is derivatively spatio-temporal when it is a constituent of something primitively spatio-temporal.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Australasian Journal of Philosophy is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Australasian Journal of Philosophy
      holder: Taylor & Francis Ltd
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2006
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N