Locke and abstraction

Posted by OJWK on April 21, 2011 · 2 Comments

Chappell’s rejection of Berkeley’s objection to abstraction in Locke’s account of ideas:
Montagues are inconsistent with Capulets.
Romeo is not inconsistent with Juliet.

Romeo and Juliet are particulars of the general sets ‘Montagues’ and ‘Capulets’ respectively, but abstracted from these sets they are not mutually inconsistent.

They are not the parts of the sets ‘Montagues’ and ‘Capulets’ that make these sets mutually inconsistent.

Like this:

Be the first to like this post.

Filed under Philosophy

Comments

2 Responses to “Locke and abstraction”

duy says:

April 21, 2011 at 10:43 pm

quite a brief summarisation on Locke and Abstraction, ‘really quite an insight’. Hope that your revision involves more rigourous thinking?

Reply
- OJWK says:
  
  April 21, 2011 at 11:30 pm
  
  well its certainly a lot more in depth!
  
  I think the Romeo and Juliet analogy schematises Chappell’s interpretation of book IV quite succinctly though.
  
  Berkeley was wrong when he presented Locke as taking the view that abstract ideas are composed of inconsistent parts.
  
  Reply