Skip to main content

Abstract Objects: A Case Study

  • Chapter
  • 279 Accesses

Part of the book series: Topoi Library ((TOPI,volume 4))

Abstract

Not a whole lot is essential to me: my identity, my kind, my origins, consequences of these, and that is pretty much it. Of my intrinsic properties, it seems arguable that none are essential, or at least none specific enough to distinguish me from other humans. And, without getting into the question of whether existence is a property, it is certainly not part of my essence to exist.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. There is an analogy here with Hartry Field’s views on “the reason” for having a truth-predicate, in the absence of any corresponding property.

    Google Scholar 

  2. See the last few pages of Putnam [1967] and “Putnam Sematics” in Hellman [1989].

    Google Scholar 

  3. This might sound funny, given the widespread view that there are some things (the sets) that are too many to form a set. This widespread view is at odds with (S) only if it is supposed that there is some definite bunch of things including all and only the sets. If the sets are a definite bunch of things, it is very hard to understand what could be wrong with gathering them together into a further set. I agree with Putnam when he says that “no concrete model [of Zermelo set theory] could be maximal — nor any non-concrete model either, as far as that goes. Even God could not make a model for Zermelo set theory that it would be mathematically impossible to extend, and no matter what `stuff He might use. [...] it is not necessary to think of sets as one system of objects […] in order to follow assertions about all sets” (Putnam [ 1967 ], p. 21 ).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Yablo, S. (2002). Abstract Objects: A Case Study. In: Bottani, A., Carrara, M., Giaretta, P. (eds) Individuals, Essence and Identity. Topoi Library, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1866-0_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1866-0_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5988-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-1866-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics