Dear 125ers,

This email is to announce the first sets of (graded) study questions and
paper topics.  There are three (3) graded study questions in this first
set (you are to answer ALL of these -- in about one page, single spaced,
each -- these will be grade mainly for effort and comprehension, and no
comments will be given on them), which are as follows:

(1) On p. 23, Loux distinguishes between a one-place universal and a
many-place universal.  What is the difference?  Is this a substantial
metaphysical difference?  Briefly discuss the differences and
similarities between one and many-place universals, and any important
ramifications they might have for metaphysical realism.

(2) Quine says:

        In debating over what there is, there are still reasons for
        operating on a semantical plane. One reason is to escape from
        the predicament noted at the beginning of this essay: the
        predicament of my not being able to admit that there are things
        which McX countenances and I do not. So long as I adhere to my
        ontology, as opposed to McX's, I cannot allow my bound variables
        to refer to entities which belong to McX's ontology and not to
        mine. I can, however, consistently describe our disagreement by
        characterizing the statements which McX affirms. Provided merely
        that my ontology countenances linguistic forms, or at least
        concrete inscriptions and utterances, I can talk about McX's
        sentences.
        
Try to explain in your own words  what Quine has in mind here.
Specifically, explain how the nominalist should interpret or understand
a realist when they say "There are universals (for instance, Courage)."

(3) Explain how Russell's theory of descriptions (described by both
Quine and Russell) paraphrases the claim ``The present king of France is
bald.''  On Russell's account, does this claim come out true or false? 
Do you think this is the right answer? Answer these same questions for
the claim ``Courage is a virtue''?

There are five (5) paper topics in this first set (you are to CHOOSE ONE
of them to write on -- in 5 pages, double-spaced -- the paper will be
graded in much more detail than the study questions, with comments),
which are as follows:

(1) Describe Austere Nominalism (the strongest rendition of it you can
muster), giving one argument for it (the best one you can think of).
Critically evaluate this argument. If you ultimately find it persuasive,
then defend it against potential objections (the best ones you can think
of); if you don't, criticize it. Your answer should contain some
discussion of the issues of simplicity and explanatory primitives,
discussed by Loux in connection with Austere Nominalism. 

(2) What is the relation of exemplification?  How must it be restricted
for Metaphysical Realism to have a chance, and why?  Is this view
defensible, in your view?  Defend your view.

(3) Describe Bradley's regress. Do you agree with Loux when he suggests
that Bradley's regress is really no more troublesome for the realist
than the Parmenidean regress(es)? Why or why not? What, ultimately, do
you think realists should conclude from Bradley's regress (i.e., how
should they respond to it), and why?

(4) Develop and analyze one of the arguments (the one you think is
strongest) adduced by Loux in support of Metaphysical Realism in chapter
1.  (That is, select either an instance of the Attribute Agreement
Argument, the Predication Argument or the Abstract Reference Argument,
depending on which one you think is strongest.) Is this argument
compelling, in your opinion? Explain why or why not.

(5)  How does Sellars' metalinguistic nominalism represent an
improvement over Carnap's. What problems are there with Sellars'
improvements, according to Loux? Do you agree with him? Why or why not?

Both the study questions, and the paper are due four weeks hence (on
10/16/03).  These assignments are also announced on the course website
(where a copy of this email was posted on 9/18/03). See:

            http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~fitelson/125/.

Good luck!

Best, 
Branden