7/22/2019 S Haack- Descriptive and Revisionary Metaphysics

1/5

..I f ir st r ead Whi tehead 's C o n c e p t o f Na ture ( pub li shed i n 1919 )when I wa s a l re adyacquaintCd'with'Sttawson's Individuals ( pu bl is he d i n 1 9. 5? ), -a n4 1 (o und it,ha r~ toresist reading W hitehead's w ork as a ~~~r s J:u 'e wd c nu qQ e o (.~ tra ws on s a un s,.metb,~l\Od ~ults.1 This suggested tl at, a study of?te cqn~AA be~een ~e tw obooks ~Rt be~,a,~ s~~ ~int ,(or,~. ~pP'raisa.1f~tr;1~son s claim thatdescrip~F metaphy lics ~ , pn on ty o vc ;r , r eV1S1 on ar ym et ap hr S1 ~. Bu t ~e com-p ar is on p r9 ve d l es s ,s tra ig htf orwa rd th an I a nt ic ip at ed , th ro ~g m to r el i~ ~somedi ff icu lt ;, que s tions under ly ing the di st inc tion be tween d~pt1~e and,reV1S1onary ,...metaphysics..Sothis paper bas a t idy first half, presentingthe contrasts~tween ,-the ~orprogram m,es, and an ~tidy second half, as~g so~e of the 'difficult ~quesu0l.l .:,:The .. contrastsare these:. . : .,~ ~;1:. ~ I. .1 'S ~so n' iU ms1 'to '-in v~ tig ate 'o ur ,o on ~p tU ai sc he ~e', ~ ~ stru ctu r~ o f o Ur ,~: thought about 'the w orld~ 'W hitehead to pro~~ ~ ne~ C01; lc ep tu~ ;

~ ..sffie a4 eq ~~ to th ~ p urp ?ses0 f sc ie n~ ; ~ .e ..S tra w,s on is ,e ng ag ed mdesc rip tive, Whi tehead m reV1S1ona ry ,metaphys1cs., ,>' .2 S tn J,w so ntak es 'o ur co ncep tu al sch em e' to have been con stant ov ~~e ~dbetWeend i ff er en t l angua ge s, 'wh il e Whit ehea d r egar ds i t a s,on l~ a n h is ton~andilOca1.a cc id en t; i.e . S tr aw son m ai nta in s, b ut Wh i~ eh~ d em es , a c on cetwd~invariance thesis., '

,

3 S tt aw so~'s c rit er io n o f o nt olo gi ca l p rio rit y i s g iv en in te rm s o f id en ti fi ab il iwh it ehea d's i n t erms o f obse rvab il it y. '... ,4 I n: 'S tr aw son's o nt ol og y m ate ri al b od ie s ( an d p er so ns ) a re g iv en pn? nty o~e r

~ ce ptu al o bj ec ts , u no bs erv ab le o bje cts , a nd e ve nts_or pr~ses; m W J:Ute-

h ~'s e ven ts are giv en p rio rity o ve r o bje cts, a n?, am ~n g o bJe ct;s, s~ nse o bje cts

7/22/2019 S Haack- Descriptive and Revisionary Metaphysics

2/5

24 Methodology and OntologicalCommitmentis d efine d w ith re spe ct to a tw o-pe rson situa tio n, w ~ich p uts p ub li.c a t ~ ad~ant-a ge over p ri va te par ti cu la rs , a nd i t must t ermina te 10 demons tr a~ ve h ldenn fi ca -t ion , which puts obse rvable a t an advantage over u~observ ,ablep~cul~s ., Amongpubl ic ly obse rvab le par ti cu la rs , t he a rgument ~~nnue s, mat~nal bodI es ( th r~ e-d imens ional ob je ct s occ upy ing s pa ce a nd per sl snng t hr ough nme) a re on to log Ic -a lly p rio r to e ve nt s, p ro ce sse s a nd st ate s; f or i de ntif ic at io n o f ~ ve n~ n01 '~ al lyp roce eds by i de nt if ic at ion o f ma te ri al bodi es , o r e ls e b~ mean~o f I de nn fi ca non o fp la ce s wh ic h, i n t ur n, a re i de nt if ie d by means o f ma te na l b .od le s; ~ u rt he rmore , ~ e-i de nt if ic at ion o f e ve nt s r equ ir es r e- iden ti fi ca ti on o f ma te na l ~ d. le s, bu t no t V1~eversa. T his is m ore dispu table th an th e argu ment fo r the pn on ty o f the p ublico ver th e p riv ate an d th e o bse rv ab le o ver th e u no bserv ab le: fo ~ th o~g h ev en ~m ig ht g en er all y b e id en ti fi ed b y re fe re nc e to th e p ers on s o r . th 1Ogs 1Ovo lv e~10t hem ('th e fi rs t tim e th is p en ci l w as u se d') o r to t he p la ce a t w hic h th ey o cc ur ( th ebat tl e o fHa s ti ng s') , a per son o r t hi ng i s s ome times i de nt if i~ d by ~ ef er ence t o ~o~ ee ve nt i n wh ic h i t par ti ci pa te s ( 't he murder we apon' ) - w hI ch r aIs es th e S Us pI CI onthat there m ay b e no un ique d ir ec ti on o f i de nt if ia bi li ty dependence a s betwe ene ve nt s a nd bod ie s. A nd th is s us pic io n i s o f s om e in te re st in v iew o f t he f ac t th atWhi tehead places events above bodie s in hi s onto logica l h ierarchy.

3 The Conce pt o f Na tu reWhite he ad wou ld a gr ee , in la rg e m ea su re , w ith S tr aw son's a cc ount o f 'o ur c o~ -c ep tual s cheme '; 'ma te ri al ism ', Wh it ehea d obse rves , i s t ho rough ly e nt re nc he d 10o ur o rd in ary w ay s o f sp eak in g. B ut W hiteh ead d oe s n ot re~ d ~ ou r c o~ ce ptu alsch em e' as p riv ileg ed ; h e reg ard s it as a n u nfo rtu nate h isto ncal a cc.:ld en t~ac onse quence o f t he s ub je ct -p re di ca te s trUc tu re o f G re ek , a nd t he n o f A ri st ot el ia nl og ic , wh ic h e nc ou ra ge d a c once pt ion o f s ubst ance a s t he u lt ima te s ubst ra tum no tp re di ca te d o f a ny th ing e ls e. Wh it ehea d would r ep la ce ou r c once pt ua l s cheme by .a no th er m ore a de qu ate f or th e p urp os es o f sc ie nc e. F or s ci en ce d ea ls w ith 'w ha tw e ob se ~e in p erc ep ti on t hr ou gh th e se ns es ' ('N atu re '), w hil e ~ te ria lism l~ ds ot he post ul at ion o f a f undament al ont ol og ic al c at ego ry - substance - whIch I J e sb e h i n d w ha t is s en so rily d is clo se d. In W h ite he ad 's f av ou re d o nto lo gy , b y c on tr as t,th e c at eg ory o f e ve nts i s m os t f un dame nt al; w e a re s en so ril y awa re . o f e ve nts ,wh ic h we the n d is cr im ina te , i n t hough t, i nt o i nd iv idual s w it h p roper ne s.Wh it ehea d c ha ra ct er iz es a n e ve nt a s ' th e s pe ci fi c c ha ra ct er o f a p la ce t hr ough ap erio d o f t im e' (it m ay , b u t n eed n ot, in vo lv e c~ ge): so th e th esis th at w hat w ea re s en so rily awa re o f is e ve nt s amoun ts to th e c la tm t ha .tw h at , ,e s e~ e h~ ~ thspat ia l and tempora l th ickness . Re flec tion on sense expenence ddTere~nates I t .m to' fa ct or s' , among wh ic h Whit ehea d d is ti ngu is he s s ub -e ve nt s a nd obj ec ts ; ob je ct sare fu rth er classified in to sen se o bje cts (c olo urs, sh ap es, sm ells, etc.), p er-ceptual objec ts (associa ted sense objects) and physica l objec ts (veridica l ~rceptualob je ct s) , a nd o f t he se , s ince phys ic al ob je ct s p re suppose per ce pt ua l ob je ct s, a ndpe rceptual object s sense object s, s ense object s a r~ the mos t ~~amenta l.S pac e an d tim e a re ab stra ctio ns fro m ce rtam ch aracte~s~ cs o f ev en ts, ~ e'c on st an ts o f e xte rn alit y'. A dura tio n is a w ho le o f N atu re hm lte d o nl y b y b emg

..,.

Descriptive and R evisionary Metaphysics 25a s im ult an ei ty ; a simu lt an ei ty h as t em po ra l t hic kn es s a nd is a n u ltim at e f ac to r inN atu re, i.e. o bserv ab le. A m om en t is a ll N atu re at an in stan t; an in stan t h as n ot empor al t hi cknes s a nd i s unobse rvab le , a n a bs tr ac ti on . By means o f t he 'me thodo f e xte ns iv e a bst ra ctio n', re ly in g o n th e re la ti on o f ex tend ing over whic h ho ld sb etw ee n dura tio ns , Wh ite he ad d ef 10 es a momen t a s a c la ss o f e ve r s ho rt er d ur a-t ions wh ic h c onver ge t o i t a s a l im i t. Then t he r el at ion o f e xt end ing over i s a pp li edto ev ents (w hich hav e spatial as w ell as tem poral thickn ess); th e m etho d ofe xt en si ve a bs tr ac tio n is u se d t o d ef in e e ve nt p ar tic le s, w hic h a re t he lim it o f th eg rad ual, d im in utio n o f th e te mp oral an d th e sp atial ex ten t o f ev en ts. E ve nt-pa rt ic le s a re the ul timate e lements of a four -d imens ional spat io temporal manifo ld ,s o th at 's pa ce a nd t im e a re e ac h p ar tia l e xp re ss io ns o f o ne fu nd am en ta l r ela tio nbetwe en e ve nt s wh ic h i s nei ther s pa ti al no r t empor al '.S o, in effec t, W hiteh ead rev erses S traw so n's o rd er o f o nto lo gical p rio rityamong par ti cu la rs : e ve nt s a re p rima ry ; ob je ct s, wh ic h a re a bs tr ac te d f rom event s,are sec on dary ; an d am on g o bjects, se nse o bjects are m ore fu nd am en tal th anphysica l objec ts.

4 Com parative Rem arksI s t he r e ~ real rivalry between Strawson's.and W hitehead's enterprises, or do theirr es ul ts d If fe r s o s tr ik in gly j us t b ec au se t he ir a im s a re d if fe re nt? I th in k th er e i s ar ea l r i va lr y, d is gu is ed by a dee p- se at ed ambigu it y i n S tr awson 's book . On the onehand , S tr awson a ll ows t ha t r ev is ionar y me ta physi cs i s f ea si bl e a nd val ua bl e; head mits th e p ossib ility th at o th ers w ith v ery d ifferen t ex perien ce m ig ht h av e ad ifferen t co ncep tu al sc hem e fro m 'o urs'; an d h e cla im s n o d eep m etap hy sica lsignificance for his criterio n o f o nto lo gical prio rity . O n th e o th er han d, hea tt ri bu te s p ri or it y t o d es cr ip tiv e o ve r re vis io na ry m eta ph ys ic s; h e u rg es t ha t'o ur' co ncep tu al sch em e is 'in disp en sa ble'; an d h e tak es w hat is, in h is sen se,on to log ic al ly p ri or , t o be what ' pr ima ri ly e xi st s'. Compa re :

m o d e s tth e b es t r ev isio na ry m eta ph ys ic s is b othin tr in si ca lly a dm ir ab le a nd o f e nd ur in gphilosophical u t il ity . (Individuals, p. 9)

ambitiousr evi siona ry me taphys ic s i s a t the serv iceo f d escrip tiv e m etap hy sics... w hichnee ds no j us ti fi ca ti on a t a ll . . . ( p . 9 ). . . our concept of reality m ight. . . haveb een different, h ad the n atu re of ou rexpe rience been fundamental ly dif fe r-e nt. (p . 2 9)

. . . t here are c ateg ories a nd co nce ptsw hich . . . c ha ng e n ot at all. (p . 1 0)

. . . i n s ay in g t ha t ma te ri al b od ie s a rebasic. . . I am not saying that theye xi st i n a p rima ry s en se , o r t ha t o nl ytheya re rea l. (p. 59 )

I m ay perhaps be said to have foundso me reason in th e idea that person sa nd ma te ri al bodi es a re what p rima ri lye xi st . ( p. 241)

7/22/2019 S Haack- Descriptive and Revisionary Metaphysics

3/5

26 Methodo logy and On to log ica l Commitmen t( an d c on sid er S tr aw so n's ambig uo us d ismis sa l o f t he c on ce pt o f p ro ce ss -th in g,w hic h 'w e n eith er h av e n or n ee d') .Th e brid ge from the m od est to the am bitio us enterprise is the conceptualin va ria nc e th es is , a th es is in tr od uc ed wh en S traws on re pli es to th e a ntic ip at edo bj ec tio n th at m et ap hy sic s s ho ul d r es is t, o r p romote , c on ce ptu al c ha ng e, th atth ere is a 'm as siv e c en tra l c ore o f c on ce pts ' w hic h 'h av e n o h is to ry '. T ho ug h h edoe sn 't , u n fo rt un at el y, t el l u s wh ich t he se concep ts a re , h e i s . conf id en t t ha t:

t he re a re ca tegor ie s and concep ts wh ich, i n t he ir most fundamen ta l cha rac te rs , ch angen ot a t a ll .O b v io us ly t he se a re n ot t he s pe ci al it ie s o f th e mo st r efmed t hi nk in g; t he ya re t he commonp lace s o f t he l ea st r ef in ed t hi nk ing ; and ye t a re t he i nd is pens ab le co reo f th e c on ce ptu al e qu ip me nt o f th e m ost so ph istic ate d h um an b ein gs . It is w itht he se . . . t h at a d e sc ri pt iv e me taphy si cs w i ll b e p rimar il y conce rn ed . ( p. 10) .S o 'o ur c onc eptua l sch em e' is co mm on to different tim es an d d iffe re nt la ngu age s.The m odest picture of descriptive m etaphysics is of various alternative con-c ep tua l sc hem es, one of w hich is 'ou rs'. B ut if the re is co nce ptual inv aria nce ove rtim e a nd b etw ee n la ng ua ge s~ th er e ar e no such alternatives. The w ay w e do thinkof the world is the only way we could think of the w orld; and the revisionarymetaphysi c ian i s r ecommending - to p ut it, a s S tra ws on d oe s n ot, b lu nd y - thatwe th in k o f- th e wo rld d if fe re nd y fr om th e w ay we must th in k o f it .Wh it eh~d, o f cou rs e, r ej ec tS t he concept ua l i nv ar ia nc e t he si s;,

t he ma te ri al is t t heo ry i s a pu re ly i nt el le c tu al r ender ing o f expe ri en ce wh ich has hadth e lu ck to g et itse lf f or mu la te d a t th e d aw n o f s cie ntif ic th ou gh t. I t h as d om in -a ted . . . t h e l anguage o f s ci en ce s in ce s ci en ce f lour is hed i n A lexand ri a, wi th t he r es ul tt ha t i t i s now hard ly po ss ib le t o s peaka t a ll w i thou t appear ing t o a ss ume i t s immedi at eobviousness. . . But when i t i sd i s tinct iy formulated. . . t he t heo ry i s ve r y f ar f rom obv iou s(The Concepto f Nature , p . 7 1, m y it al ic s)

'Ou r concep tu al s ch eme ' i s a l oc al , a nd t empor ar y, - c ci dent .S tr awson 's c ri ti cs h av e u rg ed, l ik e Wh it eh ead, t ha t t he Concep tu al i nv a ri an c et he sis i s fa ls e: B urt t p oi nts t o t he r ad ic al c ha ng es whic h th e c on ce pt o f c au se h asu nd er go ne s in ce A ri st od e; M e i a rg ue s th at th e s ub je ct- pre di ca te d is ti nc tio n, a tle as t a s S tra ws on fo rm ula te s it, d oes n ot a pp ly in C hin es e; B urtt a ls o re fe rs toWhor f' s work on Amer ican Indian languages, espec ia ll y Nook ta , wh ich , accordingto Whor f, h as n o s ub je ct -p re dic ate d is tin ct io n a t a ll, a nd Hop i, w h ic h, a cc or d-in g to Whor f, c arr ie s a m et ap hy sic i n whi ch e ve nts r at he r t ha n o bje cts a re b as ic ,a nd in whi ch th er e is n o d iff ere nC e o f c ate go ry b etw ee n s pa ce a nd tim e .3It is te mp tin g to c on clu de th at th e tru th o f th e c on ce ptu al in va ria nc e th es isis s uff ic ie nd y d ou btfu l t o ju st ify s ce pti cism a bo ut S traws on 's amb itio us p ro -g ramme a nd a ck now le dg em en t o f th e p oin tfu ln es s o f re vi si on ar y m e ta ph ys ic s.B ut th is c on cl us io n wo uld b e to o h as ty ; fo r th e e vid en ce f or c on ce pt ua l v ari an ced ep en ds o n d is pu ta ble a ss um ptio ns a bo ut tra nS la tio n, th e re la tio ns b etw ee nla ng ua ge an d m eta ph ysic s, th e id en tity o f co nc ep ts , an d so fo rth . T his le ad s

Descri pt iv e and Revi si onar y Me taphysi cs 27

th e d iffic ult q ue stio ns ra is ~~ b y th e d is tin ctio n b etw ee n d es cr ip tiv e a ndr ev Is Ionar y me taphysi cs

~esc ri p~ve m~~phys ic s i s con ten t t o des cr ib e -t he ac tu al con ten t o f ou r t hough t abou tv ~ : : : ~ p: ~~)10nary m et ap hy sic s i s c on ce rn ed t o p ro du ~ a b ett er s tr uc tu re . (Indi-

S tr aw so n's d is tin cti on is fa r mor e p ro blema tic th an th is c h c t' .Amon g ~ e q ue stio ns it ra is es a re th es e: a ra e nz ab on s ug ge st s.

~t i s a concep t? How a re concep ts i nd iv idu at ed ? Wha t i s a con cep tu al s ch eme?o w a re c on ce ptu al s ch em es in div id ua te d? W ha t is th e re la tio n b etw ee n a la n-g ua ge a nd a c on ce ptu al s ch em e? H ow a re la ng uages indiv iduated ? Wh th'we' of '0 al h '

0 are e. . ur co nce~tu sc. em e? Is descriptiv e m etaph ysics p ossib le?4 Is re-V IS IO na rym ~~ ph ys lc s p oss ib le ? W h at c ou ld it m ea n to s ay th at o ne c on ce t-u al s ch em e IS .b ette r' th an a no th er? Is o ne lo ok in g fo r th e, o ~ a , tru e c on ce ~s ch em e? O r m ag ht o ne c on ce pt ua l s ch em e b e a pp ro pr ia te f or o ne , a nd a no th :r fo ra no th er p urp os e? If th e la tte r, a re th ere a ny c on stra in ts o n th e k in ds ft ha t c oul d b e r el ev an t? 0 purposeT he r em ar ks whi ch f oll ow a re in te nd ed to m a ke a s ta rt - onl y a s ta rt - ~t tack l insome - on ly some - of these quest ions. .

g(1) S traw son's enterprise depends upon the assum ption of som e ~nnection

betw een the langua~e spoken by a group of people, and their conceptual scheme(c:J. - the Con~c t on Assump ti on (C.A.). Local descr ip t ive metaphys ics (Strawson's~ e st e nt er pn se ) n ee ds th e a ss ump tio n t ha t d iff ere nt c .s .'s a re c on ne cte d w it h. d.iffe(r;nt langu~ges - ~e Loca l Connec ti on As sumpt ion; g loba l desc ri pt iv e me taphy -SICS ~wson s amblbous enterprise) the assum p tio n th at th e . .nectedW Ithall I th G same C.S.IScon-. ff i anguages ~ lo~a/ c.0nnectionAssumption. (T he g lo ba l C . A . ism e ,e ct , a r es ta teme nt ~~ the mter li ngu lS t ic concep tua l invari ance thes is .) Whi t~head s: a:oun t o~ the ongIDSof the mater ia li st c .s ., l ike S t rawson' s loca ldesc rip tive~e tap YS ICS ,e li eson ~e L oc al C .A . W h orf's w ork o n th e H op i is lo ca l d es cribve metaphY~lcs , and ~ t he sis o f 'lin gu is tic re la tiv it y' is a v er si on o f th e ~C.A . So, I f h i s con~ lu sl on s about t he Hopi C .S .a re co rr ec t, t hey f al si fy t he G l obalC .~ ., :m d . un de rm a? e S tr aw s~ n's p re te ns io ns to g lo ba l d es crip tiv e m eta ph s ic s'wh il e I f.h is c on cl us IOn sa r e r ej ec te d b e cause t he Loca l C .A . i s d en ied t hi s I en ia iundermanes S t rawson 's p roj ,ec to f loca l desc rip tive metaphysi cs. '

(2 ) ~a t fe atu re s o f a l an gu ag e is a C .S .c on ne cte d w ith , a nd h ow? S tr aw so nu r~ es at the relev an t features are very gen eral and rather d eep gram maticaltr aIts , a nd s pe ak s a s ~ f ~ e fact th at a gram mati~ feature is specific to a sin Iela ng ua ge ~ ho ws ~ t It. IS n ot o f th e a pp ro pria te d ep th . T his a ssu mp tio n u S:e sStrapealsw son m th e dlfecbon of the G lob al C .A . W horf, by contrast thou gh ~ e alsoap o d ec :p ra ~e r th an s up erfic ia l g ra mm atic al fe atu re s, d ~ n ot a ss oc ia ted ep th W Ith u ~v e~ ty a s b etw ee n la ng ua ge s; h en ce h is c om mitm en t to th e L oc alC .A . W horf s versIon of the lo cal C .A . is n ot th at each lan guage h as its ow n,

7/22/2019 S Haack- Descriptive and Revisionary Metaphysics

4/5

2 8 M e th od olo gy a nd O n to lo gic a l C om m itm e n tu niqu e c.s.; ra th er, tha t w hile d istin ct lan gua ge s m ay be a ssoc ia te d w ith the sam ec.s., languages so different that they cannot be 'calibrated' are associated w ithdif ferent c. s.' s - he sugg ests, e.g. tha t all 'S tand ard A verag e E urop ean ' lan gua ge sare connected w ith the sam e c.s., but H opi w ith a quite different one.

( 3) T he Co nn ec tio n b e tw ee n c .s . a nd la ng ua ge m ig ht b e e it he r s tr on g o r w e ak ;i.e . th e C .A , m ig ht ta ke th e fo rm : (strong) i f L h as c erta in fe atu re s, s pe ak er s o f Lm ust a ck no wle dg e a c erta in c .s .; o r (weak) if L has certain features, it w ill ben atu ra l, th ou gh n ot c ompul so ry , fo r s pe ak ers o f L to a ck now le dg e a c er ta in c .s .Wh it eh e ad 's d ia gno si s o f t he p rov en an ce o f t he ma te ri al is t me taphy si cs r el ie s on aweak l oc a lC .A .; h is Qb se rv at io n t h a t h is u se o f unf am i li ar t erm ino logy i s d el ib er -ate p olicy , to avoid the m etaph ysical preconcep tio ns th at a less inno vatives ty le woul d b ri ng , i s p er ti nent h e re . Who rf some times c la ims a s tr ong connec ti on ,r ema rk ing t ha t t he c .s . o f a spe ak er 's n a ti ve l anguage i s 'a b so lu te ly obl ig at or y' f orh im . H is a lle gia nc e to th e stro ng C .A . is a ss oc ia te d w ith a . te nd en cy to c la imfa ilu re o f t ranS la tab il it y be twen languages s tr ong ly connec ted wi th d if fe r en t c .s . 'soB ut after claim ing that this or that H opi locution is 'untranSlatable' intoS AE la ng ua ge s, W ho rf in va ria bly g oe s o n to tra ns la te it, a lb eit in to s om ew ha ts t rangulat ed Eng li sh . Th is r ai ses many quest ions: does ' ca l ib r at e' mean ' tr anS lat e'or 'tranS late sm oothly '? A nd if L w ere co mrletely u ntranslatab le into ourla ng ua ge , s ho uld w e c ou nt it a s la ng ua ge a t a ll? H ow is o ne to o bta in e vid en ceo f h ow p eo ple th in k a bo ut th e w orld w hic h is in de pe nd en t o f th e w ay th ey ta lk .a bo ut t hewo rld ?6 Is n't th er e a d an ge r th at t ra nS la tio n w ill im p os e th e c .s . o f th etranSlator?Though , b e cause o f t he se un an swe red ques ti on s, I jCa Il 't o f fe r a f um concl us io nab out w hich, if any , version of the C .A . is co rrect, I can offer com men ts on acouple o f r el evan t examples . .(a ) O pp on en ts o f ra cism h av e d rawn a tt en ti on to th e p re ju dic ia l c ha ra cte r o fce rta in lin gu isti c fo rm s - the derogatory flavour of 'nigger' or of the use of 'boy' tore fe r to a b la ck a du lt , fo r e xample . O pp on en ts o f s ex ism h av e s us pe cte d th at th epervasiveness o f gender d i st inc tions in Eng li sh may be s imil a rly p re jud ici al .' How-ever ,Whor f obse rves tha t Ch inese l acksd i st inc tions ofgender, and Prof esso r Geacht el ls me t ha t t he s ame i s t rUeo fTu rk ishj a nd I don 't s uppose i tw i l l b e d ispu ted t ha tn eith er th e C hin ese n or th e T urk s a re e sp ec ia lly n ote d fo r th eir fre ed om fro msex ism .Th i s, I t hi nk , a rgu es f or c au ti on abou t s tr ong f orms o f t he C .A .(b ) W h ite he ad d ia gn os es th e m ate ria lis t m eta ph ys ic a s d ue , in p art, to th eu nd ue in flu en ce o f th e s ub je ct- pr ed ic at e d is tin ct io n. S traw so n a rg ue s fo r t hep rio ri ty o f m a te ria l b od ie s, a nd a pp ea ls t o th e s ub je ct- pr ed ic at e d is ti nc ti on insuppor t o f h i s ont ol og ic al h ie ra rchy. Bu t some th ing i s am is s: f or S tr awson appeal s, .t o t he sub je ct -p red ic at e d is ti nc ti on a s suppor ti ng t he p ri or it y o f p a rt ic ul ar s oVeJ .'iu niv ers als, n ot a s s up po rtin g th e p rio rity , a mo ng p artic ula rs , o f b od ie s o ve reven ts; yet it is on this po int that his an d W hite head's h ierarchi~ differ. S ~,e it he r t he sub je ct -p redi ca te d is ti nc ti on i s l es s c lo se ly connec ted Wl th t he p ar ti -c ul ar -u ni ve rs al d is ti nc ti on t han S tr awson t hi nk s, o r e ls e Wh it eh ead i s l es s f re e o fth e s ub ie ct- pr ed ic at e d is tin ctio n t ha n h e s up po se d. M y h un ch i s th at th e l atte r

Descriptivea n d R e v is io n a ry Metaphysics 2 9diagnosis is co~ect; W hitehead has succum bed to the nom inalizing tendency ofEnglish. '. . ..~ t~ he ad la ys ~ art o f th e b la me fo r th e a sc en da nc y o f th e s ub je ct-p re dic atedlStm ~?n ?n th e m f1 ue ~c e o f A ris to te lia n lo gic . B ut in th is re sp ec t (d es pite i tssup enont y m the expr es sIOno f r el at io n s) modem log ic i sn 't n o ta bl y d if fe re nt . Onth e u s~ , ? bj~ tual interpretatio n q uantifiers rang e ov er, and sing ular term sd en ote ~ o bJ ec ts . .O nl y e xp re ss io ns wh ic h s ta nd wh er e it w o ul d b e s yn ta ctic al lyprop er to put a sm gu lar term can b e genu ine v ariables, i.e. can be boun d. Th esy n~ exerts .a n ,omina li zing, the seman t ics a corr espond ing ob jec ti fy ing pressu r e.C on sid er Q U ne s a rg um en ts w hy , if o ne tre ats p re dic ate o r s en te nc e le tte rs a svari abl es , o~e i s ob liged to think. o f ' F an d p as syn tac ti cal ly l ike s ingu la r t erms ,a nd a s r an gmg o ve r a bs tr ac t o bJ ec ts , p ro pe rti es a nd p ro po sitio ns ' o r D a vid so n's~ ch fo r a n a pp ro pria te sin gu la r te rm fo r t he 'it' in 'h e d id it s lo w'ly ,w ith a k nife~ t he ba th room, ~ t ~dn igh t' . 8 (H is to ric al p are nth es is : P eir ce a rg ue d th at th ;in flu ~n ~ o f n om :n alis.m ~ n. m ode m. p hilosoph y h ad b een so pervasive thatn om m alis m a nd n om m alis ttc p la to ms m' - th e re ific atio n o f u niv ers als in toabstract par ticulars - h ad c om e to s eem th e o nly a lt ern ativ es to th e e xc lu sio n o fbonaf.1derealism~. ~ v iew o f th es e o ~s er va ti on s, th e a lt e~ tiv e o f in te rp re ti ngq ~ttfie rs s ub s~ tu tto na lly ~ d a ll ow i ng exp re ss io n s o f d if fe re nt synt ac ti c c at -e go ne s a s s ub sttt ue nd s fo r d if fe re nt s ty le s o f v ar ia bl e h as m e ta ph ys ic al a s w e llas fo rmal in te res t.

. This , thoughsketchy,sufficesform y presentpoint:that there issome reasontosuspe ct a nom in al iz in g , obj ec ti fy in g -t enden cy , wh ich sugges ts t ha t t he re may beso me th in g in a w ea k v ers io n o f th e C .A . . ~ .If th e stro ng g lo ba l C .A . w ere trU e, th ere w ou ld b e n o g en um e a lte rn ativ e to'o ur' c .s ., a nd n o s en se in w hic h a re vis io na ry m eta ph ys ic ia n c Ou ld p ro du ce a'b ette r' .c .s. B ut if th er e a re a lte rn ativ e c .s .'s, th ere a re q ue stio ns to b e a sk ed a bo utth e c ho ic e b etw ee n th em . .

(~) If c.s.'s are ~ought of as sets of concepts or categories, one w ould expect ac ho ic e to b e m ad ~ ~ terms o~ e xp re ss iv e a de qu ac yj if, h ow ev er, c .s . 's a re th ou gh t o fas sets of proposlttons or beliefs, one w ould expect a choice to be m ade in term s of~th. 9 In th e la tte r c as e a f ur th er q ue stio n w ou ld a ris e: a re 'a lte rn ativ e' c .s . 's riv als,I.e. are they to be thought of as incompatible metaphysical theories or mightalternative C .~.s be both n:ue? Straw son seem s to think of a c.s. as co~isting of as eto ~ c ate go ne s o rd er ~ W lth r esp ec t to o nto lo gic al p rio rity ; th e o rd er in g p re su m-ab ly m tr~u ces a qu asl-do ctrina l elem ent. W he n W horf, on th e othe r ha nd, c laim stbatHo~1 ~ b ette r th an S AE la ng ua ge s a t d e sc rib in g v ib ra tile p he no me na , h e se em s~be think in g of a c .s. as c om pose d of con ce pts rathe r tha n p ro po sition s.(5 ) ~ ow~ ~ e ~ div id ua tio n o f c .s .'s w ill re qu ir e, d ir ec dy o r in dire cd y, c rite riaf ~r ..~ e .md iV l du at to n o f con cep ts . And t hi s r ai se s a que st io n I avoi ded e ar li er , i n.d is cu ss io n o f t he c on ce ptu al in ~a ria nc e th es is : w he n is o ne to s ay th at a c on ce pt.bas changed, and when that It has been replaced by a new concep t? (Has'th e c on ce pt o f c au se ' c ha ng ed fro m A ris to de to H um e, o r is H um e's a d iffe re ntconcep t f rom Ar is tode 's? - th e l atte r a nswe r wo ul d e na bl e' S tr aw so n to d ef en d

7/22/2019 S Haack- Descriptive and Revisionary Metaphysics

5/5

30 Methodo logy and On to log ica l Commitmen tc once ptUa l i nvar ia nc e a ga in st Bu rt t' s c ri ti ci sm s .) An ade quat e a nswe r, f ur ther -m or e, w ou ld e vi de ndy c all f or a n a cc ount o f th e c on ce pt o f a c on ce pt .F or n ow , t ho ugh, I m u st c on te nt m y se lf w it h som e r em ark s a bout c on ce ptU alc ha nge. Ther e a re two r ival a pp roac he s, one s ta ti c, t he o ther dynam ic . The l at te r,w ith w hic h I s ympa th iz e, s ee s o ur c on ce pts a s th e r es ult o f a l on g a nd c on tin uin ge vo lu ti on , a nd a s c on ta in ing r es idues o f e ar li er s ci en ti fi c a nd me ta physi ca l t he -o ri es . (Th is i s Whit ehea d' s v iew ). When S tt awson env is ages t he poss ib il it y t ha tt he work o f r ev is ionar y me ta physi ci an s may fmd i ts way i nt o ou r ' un re fmed' v iewo f th e wor ld , a nd t hu s b ec om e a d atUm f or a mod est d es cri pt iv e m eta ph ys ic s, h eto o is taking this ap proach. From this po in t o f v iew , th e p ro spect of fu rtherc once ptUa l~ ange i s nei ther s ur pr is ing no r a la rm ing . The s ta ti c p ic tU re , however ,i s a ssociated ,with the idea that proposa ls for conceptUal revi sion can be dismisseda s sy mp to ms o f co nc ep tU al co nfu sio n. H ere is G each 's co mm en t o n th e ev en tontology:

'a t t he s am e t im e ' b el on gs n ot t o a s pe ci al s cie nc e b ut t o lo gi c. Our p ra cti ca l g ra sp o fth is lo gic is n ot to be c alle d into q ue stio n on ac co un t o f re co nd ite ph ysics... . Ap hy si ci st wh o c as ts d ou bt u po n it is s aw in g o ff t he b ra nc h h e s it s u po n. lOThe issues he raises are too large for m e to tackle here. B ut I will reveal m ys ympa th ie s b y u rg in g th at w e a re n ot o n a b ra nc h, a s i n G ea ch 's m eta ph or, r ath er ,o n a r af t, a s i n N eu ra th 's . A nd i f y o u obje ct th at th is m ea ns w e a re a ll a t s e a, I r ep lyth at th is is n o w orse, at an y rate, th an b ein g u p in th e air.

NotesI h ave been h elped b y co mm en ts w hen' earlier v ersion s o f th is p ap er w ere read at W arw ick ,D ela wa re , C am br id ge , S ou th am pto n, a nd U niv er sity C olle ge , L On do n.1 W hitehead, A . N ., Th e C o n c e p t o f Na tu re ( Ca mb rid ge U niv ers ity P re ss, 1 91 9); S tra W-

so n, P . F ., Individuals (Me th ue n, 1 95 9) .2 Contrast Price, H . H., Th in ki ng a n d Expe ri en c e (H utchinson , 19 53 ), cbs 1 an d 2 . P ricetak es as h is startin g po int th e ex perien ce of a sin gle perso n, an d hen ce giv es prio rity torep eatable 'ch aracters', th e pro perties b y m ean s o f w hich p articu lars are recog nized .T he c om pa riso n w ith P ric e's e nte rp ris e sh ow s th at S tr aw so n's in ve stig at io n, in c h. 2 ., o fw hether on e's co ncep tU al schem e m igh t b e differen t if o ne inh abited a w orld pu rely o fso un ds , is in co nc lu siv e b ec au se h e c ha ng es tw o r ele van t v ar ia ble s - assum ing a singleco nsc io us nes s w ho se ex pe rien ce co nsists en tire ly sounds - a t o nc e.

3 Bu rt t, E . A ., 'D e sc ri pt iv e m et ap hy si cs ', Mind LXXLL ( 19 53 );M e i , T su -L in , 'S ub je ctand p red ica te , a g rammat ica l p re lim ina ry ', PhilosophicalReview LXX (19 61 ); Whor f,B . L ., Language, Thought and Reali ty , e d. C ar ro ll, J. B . (M IT P re ss , 1 95 3) ; c om pa re .H ac kin g, I. M ., 'A language without part iculars' , Mind LXXVII (1968 ).4 Ob se rv e t ha t, f or e xampl e, S tr aw so n's c la im t ha t t he c on ce pt o f p e rs on i s p r im iti ve is , i nv ie w o f th e tr ac eS o f C ar te sia n d ua lis m in m uc h o f o ur ta lk a bo ut p eo ple , n orm ativ era ther than purely descr ipt ive .5 a . D av id so n, D ., 'T he v er y id ea o f a c on ce ptU al s c he me ', P re sid en tia l A dd re ss to th eAmer ic an Phi lo so ph ic al A ss oc ia ti on , 1 97 3. Od dl y, t ho ug h Dav id so n c la im s t o h av e

Descri pt iv e and Revi si ona ry Me taphysi cs 31shown t ha t n e it he r ~e i de a th at t wo c .s .' s a re d if fe re nt, n or t he i de a t ha t th ey a re th e~ e, m ake s s e ns e, h is a rg um ent s s eem t o p oi nt , i ns te ad , t o t h e c on clu si on th at t he re i sJ us t o ne c on ce ptu al s ch em e , i. e. t o t he G lo ba l C .A .6 a. Bedau, H ., review of W horf, Philosophy ofS ience 24 (1957) .7 See, e .g ., Beards ley , E . Lane , 'Ref er en ti al g ende ri sa ti on ', i n Women and Philosophy,ed sG o~~,