臺灣大學哲學系教授Department of Philosophy, National Taiwan University.彭孟堯2017-09-082018-05-292017-09-082018-05-292012-10http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/281872本論文試圖論證：殊性存有論並不需要將殊性之間的相似關係作為其存 有論的原初設定。論證主要依據所謂的「位元原則」。但這不表示「相似」 是一個沒有意義的概念。本論文建議，在形上學裡，「相似」可以化約到介 於兩個一階內存關係之間的二階內存關係，例如「大於」、「重於」；本論文 並且倡議相似現象應該訴求知識論或心理學的解釋。It is argued that Trope Particularism need not take trope-level resemblance to be an ontological primitive. The main idea is the appeal to the Arity Principle suggested by Butchvarov. But, this does not mean that “resemblance” is unintelligible. I propose that “resemblance” can be metaphysically reduced to a second order internal relation over two first order internal relations such as “greater than” and “heavier than,” and that the phenomena of similarity should call solely for an epistemological or psychological explanation.17499655 bytesapplication/pdf殊性、相似、齊一原則、位元原則、內存關係trope, resemblance, the Uniformity Principle, the Arity Principle, internal relationjournal articlehttp://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw/bitstream/246246/281872/1/0044_201210_1.pdf