Britannica
Sources used in this answer
How did Peter Abelard’s view of universals differ from nominalism?
Created from Britannica articles
using AI.
AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.
Peter Abelard
Peter Abelard, with Héloïse, miniature portrait by Jean de Meun, 14th century; in the Musee Conde, Chantilly, France.
Peter Abelard held a nuanced position on the problem of universals that distinguished his views from the nominalism taught by his teacher, Roscelin.12
While Roscelin argued that universals—such as "human" or "animal"—were merely words or names (flatus vocis) without inherent meaning, Abelard contended that this view failed to account for the fact that these names possess genuine significance.12
Abelard’s perspective differed from nominalism in the following ways:
- Meaningful Reference: Abelard argued that while only individuals are real, universals function as names or mental concepts that derive their meaning from their reference to those individuals.12
- Status (Status): Rather than signifying a shared essence (as realists maintained), Abelard proposed that universals signify the "common condition," or status, of individuals.12
- Divine Intent: He posited that this common status results from God having created individuals according to the same divine idea, providing a logical basis for the application of general terms that nominalism lacked.12