Contents

Template:Did you know nominations/Relations (philosophy)

Relations (philosophy)

• ... that according to some metaphysicians, there are no relations?

• Source: ^[1]

• ALT1: ... that the relation "being a sibling" is irreflexive because no one can be their own sibling? Source: ^[2]
• ALT2: ... that in the 19th century, philosophers changed their understanding of relations in response to developments in logic, mathematics, and science? Source: ^[3]
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Maria Luigia Pizzoli

Sources

• Mulligan, Kevin (1998). "Relations: Through Thick and Thin". Erkenntnis. 48 (2/3): 325–353. doi:10.1023/a:1005454805376.
• Heil, John (2009). "Relations". In Le Poidevin, Robin; Peter, Simons; Andrew, McGonigal; Cameron, Ross P. (eds.). The Routledge Companion to Metaphysics. Routledge. pp. 310–321. doi:10.4324/9780203879306-34. ISBN 978-0-203-87930-6.
• Makridis, Odysseus (2022). Symbolic Logic. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-3-030-67396-3.
• Bogen, James (2005). Honderich, Ted (ed.). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199264797.
• MacBride, Fraser (2020). "Relations". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 5 October 2023.

Improved to Good Article status by Phlsph7 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 21 past nominations.

Phlsph7 (talk) 08:38, 12 June 2024 (UTC).

• Freshly promoted GA, looks quite solid, not copyvio. ALT0 and ALT1 are good hooks, correctly sourced and interesting. For ALT2, the sources could be a bit more explicit about the 19th century, but I agree this is correct. I am not sure it is as interesting as the other two. QPQ has been done. Approved. —Kusma (talk) 11:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)