more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
So-called aristotelian universals have some queer features: one universal can be wholly present at different places at the same time, and two universals can occupy the same place at the same time.
Clarification
'Aristotelian' universals have actual locations
Gist of Idea
Located universals are wholly present in many places, and two can be in the same place
Source
Alex Oliver (The Metaphysics of Properties [1996], §11)
Book Ref
-: 'Mind' [-], p.25
A Reaction
If you want to make a metaphysical doctrine look ridiculous, stating it in very simple language will often do the job. Belief in fairies is more plausible than the first of these two claims.
| 11037 | Colour must be in an individual body, or it is not embodied [Aristotle] |
| 12094 | No universals exist separately from particulars [Aristotle] |
| 17677 | Past, present and future must be equally real if universals are instantiated [Armstrong] |
| 17686 | Universals are abstractions from states of affairs [Armstrong] |
| 15442 | Universals are abstractions from their particular instances [Armstrong, by Lewis] |
| 15747 | Universals aren't parts of things, because that relationship is transitive, and universals need not be [Lewis] |
| 10724 | Located universals are wholly present in many places, and two can be in the same place [Oliver] |
| 7963 | Aristotle's instantiated universals cannot account for properties of abstract objects [Oliver] |
| 10730 | If universals ground similarities, what about uniquely instantiated universals? [Oliver] |
| 4454 | The One-In-Many view says universals have abstract existence, but exist in particulars [Moreland] |
| 10197 | An immanent universal is wholly present in more than one place [Zimmerman,DW] |
| 9486 | Why should a universal's existence depend on instantiation in an existing particular? [Bird] |