Quine's Ontology

Quine's Ontology in On What There Is and Word and Object, The Analytic Tradition, Spring 2017

[ahmedbellankas]

Please, please, if you can, do us a series on philosophy of mathematics.

[craigreedtcr]

Great lecture! Very clear… easy to follow.

[bblfish]

Great explanation of how Quine ends up moving from nominalism to accepting Sets.
I wonder how that would play out had he known about Category Theory, which are sets with structure. Do you explore than anywhere?

[rgaleny]

THE BEST THINGS, CAN'T BE TALKED ABOUT. THE NEXT BEST THING IS HOW WE TRY TO TALK ABOUT THEM BY ANALOGY.

[MyriadColorsCM]

To answer the question posed of which one is more fundamental, the "roundness" or "round", I think its the other way around, everything we recognize as "round" is an abstraction over things that resemble the quality of having "roundness", that is, to be "round" isn´t informative, its a judgement on particular objects. B ut that doesn´t mean any concrete particular object has the property of "roundness" but only that they resemble "roundness", this property is only truly present on an abstract realm of perfect "roundness" and by that, I do not mean that there is, necessarily, such a thing as a perfect "roundness", but if there isn´t, we are committed to some kind of nominalism by default.

In other words, there is no "round".

[JonSebastianF]

You mention the last chapter in *_Word and Object_* titled *"Ontic Decision"* :
The readings for this class, were they the whole chapter (§48-56), or just the first three paragraphs, as in *_Quintessence_* (§48-50)?

[alwayswondering]

How do you narrow your field of study in post-graduate work in phil. ? I couldn't do it.
Short of pulling all my hair out.

[roenblanke]

Does anyone know if Prof. Bonevac has explicated his own personal views? I cannot find anywhere he summarizes his own ontology, for example.

[MGHOoL]

Hmm.. How can one say: X does not belong to X? This is an internal contradiction like saying "This sentence is wrong" which is really a matter of saying x=/ x and defying the first principle of logic: identity. Also, how is that an argument against nominalism?

[DinoDiniProductions]

Physics is built on Philosophy, but this logical reality is usually ignored for convenience.

[rgaleny]

proto particles are not measurable,
YET !!!!

[cherubsasquatch]

Ecclesiastes answers all of these questions this mans ax

[cherubsasquatch]

Why is what is real real? Cuz it's real. Mic drop

[cherubsasquatch]

Jesus Christ died and rose to justify you before Him