“#Constructivism vs. #Realism - Would you rather have the red pill or the blue pill?”

The following #essay has actually been planned for some time and comes from the series “How much #construction does #reality contain?”, which I had already introduced with the older text #realists vs. #nominalists - or the old #dualism #thinking vs. #language.

More at: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2025/01/04/konstruktivismus-vs-realismus/

#Realists vs. #nominalists - or the old #dualism “#thinking vs. #language”

In the next series, I would like to revisit an old problem that deals with the question: “How much #construction does #reality contain?”. To determine this, you don't even need “#VR (#virtual #reality) glasses” to “look the supposed #reality in the eye”.

https://museum-der-philosophie.de/?p=6415

or: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/07/02/realisten-vs-nominalisten/

#Realists vs. #nominalists - or the old #dualism "#thinking vs. #language"

I would like to start this series with a look back at the "Universalienstreit im Mittelalter". But instead of looking into my archives, I would like to refer you to the summarized form that I published as an article on the very readable site "Museum für Europäische Philosophie" by Klaus Fürst. So here is the link:

https://museum-der-philosophie.de/?p=6415

or: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/07/02/realisten-vs-nominalisten/

#Realists vs. #nominalists - or the old #dualism "#thinking vs. #language"

In the next series, I would like to revisit an old problem that deals with the question: "How much construction does reality contain?". In the following essay, I would like to point out that this question is actually much older than one might think and has its origins in the Middle Ages, but has nevertheless lost none of its topicality.

https://museum-der-philosophie.de/?p=6415

or: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/07/02/realisten-vs-nominalisten/

#Realists vs. #nominalists - or the old #dualism "#thinking vs. #language"

In the following, I would therefore like to shed new light on this old topic in order to perhaps make a small contribution to overcoming the supposed dualism of "realists vs. nominalists". I had noticed, not only in the numerous contributions in the comments section on my site (for which I would like to take this opportunity to thank you once again), but also in the contributions on social media, that the discourse was very often about the correct interpretation of the meaning of a term.

To begin with, this is not a particularly spectacular observation, let alone insight, as the inadequacy of language usage is well known and not just in the circles of feuilletonists or linguists. Modern philosophy in the form of the epistemologist and philosopher Markus Gabriel had already dealt with this problem in his book "Why the world does not exist" in his critique of an "ontology of meaning".

https://museum-der-philosophie.de/?p=6415

https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/07/02/realisten-vs-nominalisten/

#Realists vs. #nominalists - or the old #dualism "#thinking vs. #language"

In the next series, I would like to revisit an old problem that deals with the question: "How much construction does reality contain?". In the following essay, I would like to point out that this question is actually much older than one might think and has its origins in the Middle Ages, but has nevertheless lost none of its topicality.

https://museum-der-philosophie.de/?p=6415

or: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/07/02/realisten-vs-nominalisten/