General names - Philosophical Concept | Alexandria
General names, seemingly straightforward labels for classes of entities, conceal a labyrinth of philosophical and linguistic complexity, inviting us to question the very nature of categorization and its impact on thought. Are they merely convenient shorthands, or do they reflect a deeper, perhaps even flawed, understanding of reality?
The story of general names winds back to the heart of ancient philosophical inquiries and argumentation. Plato's theory of Forms, explored extensively in dialogues like "The Republic," posits the existence of ideal, perfect archetypes from which particular instances derive their shared name. For example, all beautiful things share in the Form of Beauty. Aristotle, Plato's student, shifted the focus to observable specific instances and the process of logic. His work on syllogism explores how valid vs invalid arguments can be formed using general terms. These foundational debates laid groundwork for understanding how we categorize and discuss the world. Later, figures such as John Locke and David Hume tackled the problem of universals, questioning the basis of our ability to abstract and form general ideas. General names are central in critical thinking and epistemology.
As logic and moral philosophy developed, the understanding and use of general terms became deeply intertwined. Debates about objective morality versus subjective morality, for example, hinge on whether we can arrive at general principles that are applicable to all. When the veil of ignorance is understood, we see that this device is created through the use of general terms (one doesn't consider their particular social standing, but considers general social standing). The rise of modern cognitive science and moral psychology adds another layer of complexity. Work on cognitive bias, such as the wason test, suggests that our ability to reason with general categories may be flawed. These flaws are highlighted when considering the ethics in AI. The use of general terms may promote fairness bias in decision-making. Even the interpretation of the trolley problem may be impacted by how we generalize relevant criteria. The experiment ethics that guide these experiments, for example, rely on the use of general terms.
The persistent allure of general names lies in their power to simplify and organize our understanding of the chaotic world, yet their very nature forces examination of our assumptions. Do they reveal the inherent structure of reality or merely reflect the cognitive capabilities and limitations of the human mind? Such questions continue to fuel debate, making general names an enduring subject of study and reflection.