Lexicon of Arguments

 

I 270
Particular/universal/completeness/introduction/Strawson: in what sense is a thought in relation to a particular complete, but not of a unversal?
>Particular/Strawson, >Universal/Strawson.
Too vague: particular = construction of facts.
Universal = abstraction from facts.
>Abstraction.
Not even thought of a kind of particular-U as an example, which serves as a "substratum".
>Substratum.
Solution: at the end of facts must be that the particular is not included as a component inclued.
Then we have a complete thought.
But it is incomplete if we move on to the particular because this is part of a further fact.
"Last facts": only feature-localizing statements like "here is water", etc.
>Facts/Strawson, >Terminology/Strawson.