Re: what is reification?

John Jones wrote:

The fallacy of reification seems to be an assertion from the position
that advocates the denial of objects that do not obey physical laws,

No, usually one erroneously claims physical being of abstract things or ideas.
One is not _denying_ the being of anything when making the error.


A unicorn is considered as a fallacious reification IF it is
considered as a hybrid mental/physical entity - such as we might call
a mythical creature.

That is just not how the term is used.


But what ought not to be denied is the place that a unicorn has had,
and may still have as an autonomous conscious agency

A unicorn is not the conscious agency or idea.
A conscious agent/idea is not a horselike creature with a
magic horn between its eyes. You have just fallen into
the very fallacy of reification _itself_!




.