Unrecognized Particulars: A Reply to Mr. Barber

John Trentmana1

a1 Huron College, University of Western Ontario

Mr Barber has admirably understood what he calls my first argument. Unfortunately, he thinks it does not succeed in demonstrating that the phenomenological argument Jbr the existence of bare particulars is circular. Or, rather, he thinks t he phenomeno-logical argument need not be taken in the way I suggested but can be put so that my argument will not apply to it. His attempted phenomenological rejuvenation of the putative acquaintance with bare particulars will not do. Indeed, it can be used to illustrate one of the points I tried to make in my original paper.

(Online publication March 1967)