from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition
- n. Philosophy The doctrine holding that abstract concepts, general terms, or universals have no independent existence but exist only as names.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
- n. A doctrine that universals do not have an existence except as names for classes of concrete objects.
from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English
- n. The principles or philosophy of the Nominalists.
from The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia
- n. The doctrine that nothing is general but names; more specifically, the doctrine that common nouns, as man, horse, represent in their generality nothing in the real things, but are mere conveniences for speaking of many things at once, or at most necessities of human thought; individualism. ,
from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.
- n. (philosophy) the doctrine that the various objects labeled by the same term have nothing in common but their name
It doesn't depend on whether they think realism/nominalism is true in the possible worlds in which they exist, but whether it actually is so.
Please note that whether Socrates or Nocrates (Sid or Nid) believe realism/nominalism is true is beside the point.
If Nocrates lives in a possible world where nominalism is true what more needs to be explained?
Nocrates lives in the possible world where nominalism is true.
Goodman and Quine (in his pre-naturalist phase) once began an article by declaring that the basis for their nominalism was a fundamental philosophical intuition irreducible to scientific grounds (1947).
If so, it would be classified as nominalism in ontology, and as conventionalism in logical theory.
 This discussion was over what was known as nominalism vs. realism.
This seems like the worst kind of nominalism — to assert that the essential nature of human procreation is somehow affected by what intellectual constructs we believe.
The kind of nominalism you're talking about is actually what many psychologists think is going on with some forms of affect: we seem have some kind of generalized sense of 'arousal' (their term, not mine) which we then transform into anger, romantic excitement, fear, and so on with post hoc explanatory narratives.
Darn thing didn't pick up "nominalism"; I'll try for 100 MB of Essence next.