applying results of shadow Qing to race

talk about shadows - creating a space of positions on their being - will later apply to social ontology - race

ontology --> study of being, social concerns being in the social world

e.g. shing light over hands, resulting on 2 hand shaped shadows - 2 induvials of the kind of shaws

easy to mix up kinds & particulars in speech --> e/g/ you & i drive the same car - particulars would be the same singular car, particulars would be same type of car

put onto shadows: suppose 2 things are identical can say they have same shadow - this is weird interpreation - interpretate as particulars

ii) its causally efficacious - capacity to bring about something/amke something happen

hard to fault RTL - doent look poss for things to be causly effcacious & not exist

LTR not obviouly true - seems poss for things to be cauily inert

LTR maintains that X only exists if X has capcity to bring about something

RTL maintains X has such a capcity only if X exists

basic kinds are real - instaces exist - but dont metaphysically derive existance from anything else --> bsic kinds just exist

can think basic kinds can be caused to exist (basic ness jsut ensures their existance doesnt consist in existance or activty of something else

real as well - existance is derived from other things - real in virtue of other aspects of reality

e.g. football teams are derived from players, fans, clubs, etc)

when kind is derivative key Q about metaphysical basis of its intances = are they derived from mental or lingustic phenomena

following common sense shadows are derivative

e.g. artifact types: portraits, sontas, spoons, buildings, also meaning bits of lang - word 'dog' or 'dude'

objecrtive - shadows derived from light reflectance properties of surfaces, which are objective, therfores stands to reason shadows are too

BUT shadow in daylight - clear where is & isnt cause less light bouncing off surfaces where shaodow is - but will be light bouncing off surfaces in the shadow jsut not enoigh to ee these surfaces well --> other creatures be able to see these surfaces well - for them no difference inside & out of shadow

existance of shadow is related to perceptual capcities --> shadows are subjective

suppose shadows are subjective - existance derives from something about mind &/or lang

I-facts = then shadow turns out to be like beuty - widly held view that its in 'eye of beholder' - shadows are responce dependant

1stintuitivly put: does the metaphysical base of shadows have to do with I-facts or we-facts

We-facts = shadows turn out like public land meanings - e.g. what makes happiness mean happiness is way speakers use it - shadows are socially constructed

e.g. of horse barn - 1 kind of thing, 5 instances of horses

racial kinds refer to: whites, blacks, latinos, asians, etc..