more from this thinker     |     more from this text

Single Idea 15388

[filed under theme 8. Modes of Existence / E. Nominalism / 1. Nominalism / b. Nominalism about universals ]

Full Idea

Every universal is one particular thing and it is not a universal except in its signification, in its signifying many thing.

Gist of Idea

Universals are single things, and only universal in what they signify

Source

William of Ockham (Summa totius logicae [1323]), quoted by Claude Panaccio - Medieval Problem of Universals 'William'

Book Ref

'Routledge Companion to Metaphysics', ed/tr. Le Poidevin/Simons etc [Routledge 2012], p.55

A Reaction

Sounds as if William might have liked tropes. It seems to leave the problem unanswered (the 'ostrich' problem?). How are they able to signify in this universal way, if each thing is just distinct and particular?

The 16 ideas with the same theme [denial of the real existence of universals]:

5869 The thesis of the Form of the Good (or of anything else) is verbal and vacuous [Aristotle]
10396 If 'animal' is wholly present in Socrates and an ass, then 'animal' is rational and irrational [Abelard, by King,P]
10395 Abelard was an irrealist about virtually everything apart from concrete individuals [Abelard, by King,P]
9103 A universal is not a real feature of objects, but only a thought-object in the mind [William of Ockham]
15388 Universals are single things, and only universal in what they signify [William of Ockham]
17247 The only generalities or universals are names or signs [Hobbes]
7717 All things that exist are particulars [Locke]
7718 Universals do not exist, but are useful inventions of the mind, involving words or ideas [Locke]
6715 Universals do not have single meaning, but attach to many different particulars [Berkeley]
6719 No one will think of abstractions if they only have particular ideas [Berkeley]
23650 Only individuals exist [Reid]
9006 Commitment to universals is as arbitrary or pragmatic as the adoption of a new system of bookkeeping [Quine]
15402 There is no entity called 'redness', and that some things are red is ultimate and irreducible [Quine]
8576 The One over Many problem (in predication terms) deserves to be neglected (by ostriches) [Lewis]
8503 The particular/universal distinction is unhelpful clutter; we should accept 'a is F' as basic [Devitt]
4232 Nominalists believe that only particulars exist [Lowe]