2007-05-15 18:50:58 · 4 answers · asked by The Knowledge Server 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
~~~ True. But even if universals were included they can still be unpredictable. Nothing is a sure thing, because things are constantly changing.~~~
2007-05-19 13:02:08 · answer #1 · answered by donelle g. 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I apologize for being one of the last surviving realists in the world. Am I a particular yet?
I'd have to disagree on grounds that one particular, the self, is predictable absent reference to universals. Taking that to the extreme example, an infant has few concepts of type, property or relation, but has an intuitive understanding of the function of their body. They obtain desirable outcomes despite having limited cognitive abilities in predicting outcomes through a larger world view or grasp of universals. On the basis of a-priori self-awareness, I'd have to disagree.
2007-05-16 02:22:20 · answer #2 · answered by Michael C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I disagree. Particulars are enough for prediction, but the sum of predictions will become unpredictable in their exclusion of universals.
2007-05-16 02:08:10 · answer #3 · answered by Monita C 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the first need (universality) is not before the second (particularity) then not prediction, prediction is not utility.
2007-05-16 20:34:58 · answer #4 · answered by Psyengine 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋