Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: May 2, 2025
There is no real difference, except in language, between this theory of Predication and the theory of Hobbes. For a class is absolutely nothing but an indefinite number of individuals denoted by a general name. The name given to them in common, is what makes them a class. To refer anything to a class, therefore, is to look upon it as one of the things which are to be called by that common name.
This is an instance of crux; adhipati is a verb of incomplete predication, implying etya or encountering. Here the compassion of Mahadeva is shown. The commentator explains that eshu refers to these words; chatanachetanani would include all animate and inanimate existences. The word adi following implies heaven and all unseen entities.
We predicate of man the name mortal; and by predicating the name, we may be said, in an intelligible sense, to predicate what the name expresses, the attribute mortality; but in no allowable sense of the word predication do we predicate of man the class mortal. We predicate of him the fact of belonging to the class.
Here the predication is of species in the subjective sense, the inference in the objective sense. Reduced to plain terms, the argument seems to be: Species are ideas; therefore the objects from which the idea is derived cannot vary or blend, and cannot have had a genealogical connection.
Thirdly, when a sensation occurs, it is brought into relation in the mind with one or more of these types or notions; this is predication, true also in so far as its elements are true, but capable of falsehood, as subsequent or independent sensation may prove. If supported or not contradicted by sensation, it is or may be true; if contradicted or not supported by sensation, it is or may be false.
For, as has already been remarked, proper names have strictly no meaning; they are mere marks for individual objects: and when a proper name is predicated of another proper name, all the signification conveyed is, that both the names are marks for the same object. But this is precisely what Hobbes produces as a theory of predication in general.
Although, however, Hobbes’s theory of Predication, according to the well-known remark of Leibnitz, and the avowal of Hobbes himself, renders truth and falsity completely arbitrary, with no standard but the will of men, it must not be concluded that either Hobbes, or any of the other thinkers who have in the main agreed with him, did in fact consider the distinction between truth and error as less real, or attached less importance to it, than other people.
J. S. Mill remarks that this omits the special function of verbs their 'employment in predication. James Mill, however, has his own view of 'predication. 'Man' is a mark of John, Peter, Thomas, and the rest.
This kind of imperfect definition, however, takes its rise from the same cause as the other, namely, the willingness to accept as a definition anything which, whether it expounds the meaning of the name or not, enables us to discriminate the things denoted by the name from all other things, and consequently to employ the term in predication without deviating from established usage.
Unsound intellection is false understanding, not resting on a perception of the true nature of things. When the object is not truly perceived, when the observation is inaccurate and faulty, thought or reasoning based on that mistaken perception is of necessity false and unsound. Predication is carried on through words or thoughts not resting on an object perceived.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking