Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predication Sortalism

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Logic of Sortals

Part of the book series: Synthese Library ((SYLI,volume 408))

  • 177 Accesses

Abstract

The focus of this chapter is on predication sortalism, that is, the view that exercise of predication necessarily requires sortal concepts. We distinguish two interpretation of this view; one we call radical and the other moderate predication sortalism. For each of these interpretations a semantic system is characterized. Both semantics are for the bidimensional formal language of Chap. 3 and provide a non-standard interpretation of predication. We state a formal system for moderate predication sortalism and show the system to be sound and complete, with respect to the semantics for moderate predication sortalism. We also indicate how to formulate a formal system for radical predication sortalism as well as show its soundness and completeness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For recent discussions on the nature of predication from the point of view of linguistics and philosophy, see the contributions in Stalmaszczyk (2017a,b).

  2. 2.

    For a similar view of predication as a cognitive act see Soames (2010, 2015).

  3. 3.

    See Chap. 1, Sect. 1.10.

  4. 4.

    These are the sort of concepts that adjectives and intransitive verbs, for instance, generally stand for.

  5. 5.

    See Chap. 1, last section.

  6. 6.

    Or its subjects, in the case of the predication of a relational concept.

  7. 7.

    See Xu (1997).

  8. 8.

    See Xu (1997, 2007), Xu et al. (1999), and Xu and Carey (1996).

  9. 9.

    For the criticism, see Ayers (1997), Casati (2004), Hirsch (1997), and Wiggins (1997).

  10. 10.

    See Freund (2018) for a philosophical justification of predication sortalism following this line of thought.

  11. 11.

    See Baker (2003).

  12. 12.

    For the source of the content of this paragraph and details on early word learning, see Waxman and Lidz (2006), Gelmand and Kalish (2006), and Tomasello (2006).

  13. 13.

    For a more detailed argument for predication sortalism, along these lines, see Freund (2018). Predication sortalism can also be justified from a realist perspective. For this, see Lowe (2009).

  14. 14.

    Predication sortalism might find an ally in conceptual and linguistic relativism, that is, the view that the ontology of reality depends on our conceptual scheme or the structure and content of language, respectively. Predication sortalism does not necessarily imply the ontological theories in question, but if these theories were assumed, predication sortalism would be an adequate approach to be adopted. For a characterization of conceptual relativism, see Baghramain and Carter (2015). For a critique of conceptual relativism, see Davidson (1974).

References

  • Ayers, M. (1997). Is Physical Object a sortal concept? A reply to Xu. Mind and Language, 12, 393–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baghramain, M., & Carter, J. A. (2015). Relativism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives//win2018/entries/relativism/

  • Baker, M. (2003). Lexical categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Casati, R. (2004). Is the object concept formal? Dialectica, 58, 383–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D. (1974). On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. In Davidson (2001) (pp. 183–198).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freund, M. (2018). Predication and sortal concepts. Synthese. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-02030-7

  • Gelmand, S., & Kalish, C. (2006). Conceptual development. In Kuhn and Siegler (2006) (pp. 687–733).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, E. (1997). Basic objects: A reply to Xu. Mind and language, 12, 406–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, E. (2009). More kinds of beings: A further study of individuation, identity and the logic of sortal terms. Sussex: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soames, S. (2010). What is meaning? Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Soames, S. (2015). Rethinking language, mind, and meaning. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stalmaszczyk, P. (Ed.). (2017a). Philosophy and logic of predication. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stalmaszczyk, P. (Ed.). (2017b). Understanding Predication. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello, M. (2006). Acquiring linguistic construction. In Kuhn and Siegler (2006) (pp. 255–298). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waxman, S., & Lidz, J. (2006). Early word learning. In Kuhn and Siegler (2006) (pp. 299–335).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, D. (1997). Sortal concepts: A reply to Xu. Mind and Language, 12, 413–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F. (1997). From Lot’s wife to a pillar of salt: Evidence that physical object is a sortal concept. Mind and Language, 12(3–4), 365–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F. (2007). Sortal concepts, object individuation, and language. Trends in Cognitive Science, 11, 400–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F., & Carey, S. (1996). Infants metaphysics: The case of numerical identity. Cognitive Psychology, 30, 111–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F., Carey, S., & Welch, J. (1999). Infant’s ability to use object kind information for object individuation. Cognition, 70, 137–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Professor of Logic and Philosophy, Graduate Program in Philosophy, University of Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica

    Max A. Freund

Authors
  1. Max A. Freund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Freund, M.A. (2019). Predication Sortalism. In: The Logic of Sortals. Synthese Library, vol 408. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18278-6_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation