Re: what is reification?
- From: John Jones <jonescardiff@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:28:01 -0700
On Oct 30, 6:20?pm, mbstevens <NOXwebmast...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Much more informally, reification is the fallacy of taking mental
entities as real, for instance taking a unicorn as real.
The case of love is less clear.
Your definition is not correct. Reification is not the the fallacy of
taking mental entities as real. That's materialism. Reification is the
fallacy of granting causal agency to grammatical expedients. For
example, 'being stressed causes suffering' is the reification of
stress because it is a synonym for suffering.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: what is reification?
- From: Peter_Smith
- Re: what is reification?
- References:
- what is reification?
- From: YKY
- Re: what is reification?
- From: mbstevens
- what is reification?
- Prev by Date: Re: A missing definition in "Gödel's Proof" by Nagel & Newman (open letter)
- Next by Date: Re: Proof of a certain theorem in "Gödel's Proof" by Nagel & Newman
- Previous by thread: Re: what is reification?
- Next by thread: Re: what is reification?
- Index(es):