Question

Peter Forrest and D.M. Armstrong considered nested examples of these things in a paper critiquing the principle of recombination. In the paper “Beyond [these things],” Takashi Yagisawa theorized their opposites, which Daniel Nolan illustrated with the example of Hobbes secretly squaring the circle. Saul Kripke argued that Hubert Humphrey would not care about a notion of identity named for these things (15[1])in a critique of counterpart theory. One of these things is a “vast mosaic of local matters of particular fact,” according to (*) Humean supervenience. The “creaturely essence” is “trans-[these things] depraved” (10[3])according to Alvin Plantinga, who reformulated the ontological argument in terms of these things. (10[1]-5[1])In On the Plurality of these things, David Lewis argued that these things literally exist, defending modal realism. For 10 points, Leibniz argued that we live in the best of what things? ■END■ (10[1])

Back to tossups

Buzzes

Summary