Scotistic realism

Last updated

Scotistic realism (also Scotist realism or Scotist formalism) is the Scotist position on the problem of universals. It is a form of moderate realism, which is sometimes referred to as 'scholastic realism'. [1] [2] The position maintains that universals exist both in particular objects and as concepts in the mind. [3]

Contents

The "problem of universals" was an ancient problem in metaphysics about whether universals exist. For John Duns Scotus, a Franciscan philosopher, theologian and Catholic priest, universals such as "greenness" and "goodness" exist in reality. This is opposed to the later nominalism of William of Ockham, and the earlier conceptualism of Abelard, which say universals exist only within the mind and have no external or substantial reality, or universals don't exist at all (including the mind). [4] [5] In addition, Scotus doesn't think that universals exist in some "third realm" or "Platonic heaven", as Plato thought (i.e. Platonism). [6]

In this way, Scotistic realism can be seen as a middle ground between Aristotelian realism (i.e. immanent realism) and conceptualism. [7] Scotistic realism can also be seen to take a nod to Platonism. [8] Not because Scotus thinks that universals ultimately trace back to a "Platonic Heaven"; rather, because (for Scotus) universals ultimately trace back to ideas in God's mind. [9] [10]

Therefore, scotistic realism affirms that universals exist in particular objects, finite minds, and the infinite mind of God. [11] [12]

In scholasticism

The problem of universals existed as early as Plato, who taught the Theory of Forms, that universal "forms" existed. This opinion was rejected by many later thinkers, such as Peter Abelard, who instead argued that forms are merely mental constructs. [13]

Antonio De Fantis, Tabula generalis ac Mare magnum Scotice subtilitatis De Fantis - Tabula generalis ac Mare magnum Scotice subtilitatis - 4324737.tiff
Antonio De Fantis, Tabula generalis ac Mare magnum Scotice subtilitatis

Scotus denied these claims; in his Opus Oxoniense he argued that universals have a real and substantial existence. [14] For Scotus, the problem of universals was closely tied to that of individuation, by identifying what makes a particular thing this or that particular thing; we could also come to understand if any form of universal exists, it is in this work that Scotus introduces the word "haecceity", which means the "thisness" of a particular object – what makes it what it is.

I say then that the main reason for the likening or similarity is the form itself shared between the generator and the generated, not according to individual unity and identity insofar as it is "this" form, but according to a lesser unity and identity insofar as it is a form. The reason for generating is in accordance with this. Form also is a more principal reason for the distinction than matter is, because just as the form is more principally that by which something is a composite than the matter is, so it is more principally that by which a composite is one, and consequently not distinguished in itself and yet distinct from everything else

Scotus, Ordinatio II, d. 3, p. 1. q. 6, n. 210 [Scotus, (1950-), 7:412-413; Spade (1994), 69]

In this, Scotus argues that form is a better means of individuating a particular object; because according to him the form of an object as a composite is the best manner of making objects distinct from one another, rather than the matter of the object. This is at the heart of Scotist realism, particularly at the theories of haecceity and formal distinction. Scotus also argues, against Aquinas and others, that there is no distinction between the essence of a thing and its existence. [15]

Interpretation of C. S. Peirce

The American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce was quite influenced by Scotus. Here is a statement of Peirce's interpretation of Scotistic Realism by T. A. Goudge:

The gist of that 'subtle and difficult' doctrine is taken by Peirce to be as follows. Apart from thought, only singular things exist. But there are in singulars certain 'natures,' themselves neither universal nor particular, which constitute the ground of intelligibility. In things, these natures are particular; when brought into relation with an act of the intellect, they are universal ... Thus, for example, the directly experienced hard surface of a particular stone is determinate, whereas the universal hardness which the intellect grasps is indeterminate or general. A consequence of this view is that the individual per se is not a proper object of knowledge. What we know are genera and species, themselves the product of mental action. Yet because complete being embraces both universality and particularity, because man perceives the singular with his senses while cognizing the universal with his intellect, it is possible for him to attain to the singular by relating universals to something which is this. [16]

Peirce interprets Scotus's idea of individuation or haecceity (thisness) in terms of his own category of "secondness." When we think of this, we are relating our pointing finger, for example, or a particular sense organ with another individual thing. As Scotus said, "nothing is this in itself." It is so only in relation to something else. Goudge goes on to give Peirce's argument for the objectivity of universals:

The objection may be raised that such a view destroys the reality of the universal by making it depend on a relation to thought. Peirce replies that this objection springs from the belief that the real must be wholly independent of reflective activity, i.e., must be a thing in itself. But the notion of the thing in itself is self-contradictory, for it requires us to think about what is per definitionem out of relation to thought. We can have no conception of any incognizable reality ... Indeed, “a realist is simply one who knows no more recondite reality than that which is represented in a true representation.” [17]

Notes

  1. Peterson, J. (1999). Introduction to scholastic realism. New York: Peter Lang.
  2. Mayorga, R. M. P. T. (2002). On Universals: The Scholastic Realism of John Duns Scotus and Charles Sanders Peirce. University of Miami.
  3. "Scotus, John Duns | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy".
  4. "conceptualism" in The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Simon Blackburn. Oxford University Press, 1996. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. 8 April 2008
  5. Paul Vincent Spade, Five Texts on the Mediaeval Problem of Universals: Porphyry, Boethius, Abelard, Duns Scotus, Ockham, Indianapolis, Hackett, 1994.
  6. "Scotus, John Duns | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy".
  7. Williams, Thomas, "John Duns Scotus", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/duns-scotus/>.
  8. Mayorga, R. M. P. T. (2002). On Universals: The Scholastic Realism of John Duns Scotus and Charles Sanders Peirce. University of Miami.
  9. Peterson, J. (1999). Introduction to scholastic realism. New York: Peter Lang.
  10. Mayorga, R. M. P. T. (2002). On Universals: The Scholastic Realism of John Duns Scotus and Charles Sanders Peirce. University of Miami.
  11. Peterson, J. (1999). Introduction to scholastic realism. New York: Peter Lang.
  12. Mayorga, R. M. P. T. (2002). On Universals: The Scholastic Realism of John Duns Scotus and Charles Sanders Peirce. University of Miami.
  13. Abelard:Logica Ingredientibus (Glosses on Porphyry)
  14. Opus Oxoniense II. D3, 1-6, 1-212
  15. Opus Oxoniense I iii 1-2,
  16. Thomas A. Goudge, The Thought of C. S. Peirce (Dover 1969), p. 99.
  17. Charles S. Peirce, Collected papers 5.312.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nominalism</span> Philosophical view with two varieties

In metaphysics, nominalism is the view that universals and abstract objects do not actually exist other than being merely names or labels. There are at least two main versions of nominalism. One version denies the existence of universals – things that can be instantiated or exemplified by many particular things. The other version specifically denies the existence of abstract objects – objects that do not exist in space and time.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Problem of universals</span> Philosophical question of whether properties exist and, if so, what they are

The problem of universals is an ancient question from metaphysics that has inspired a range of philosophical topics and disputes: Should the properties an object has in common with other objects, such as color and shape, be considered to exist beyond those objects? And if a property exists separately from objects, what is the nature of that existence?

In metaphysics, a universal is what particular things have in common, namely characteristics or qualities. In other words, universals are repeatable or recurrent entities that can be instantiated or exemplified by many particular things. For example, suppose there are two chairs in a room, each of which is green. These two chairs both share the quality of "chairness", as well as greenness or the quality of being green; in other words, they share a "universal". There are three major kinds of qualities or characteristics: types or kinds, properties, and relations. These are all different types of universals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Essence</span> Properties that make an entity or substance what it is

Essence is a polysemic term, that is, it may have significantly different meanings and uses. It is used in philosophy and theology as a designation for the property or set of properties or attributes that make an entity or substance what it fundamentally is, and which it has by necessity, and without which it loses its identity. Essence is contrasted with accident: a property or attribute the entity or substance has contingently, without which the substance can still retain its identity.

Objective idealism is a philosophical theory that affirms the ideal and spiritual nature of the world and conceives of the idea of which the world is made as the objective and rational form in reality rather than as subjective content of the mind or mental representation. Objective idealism thus differs both from materialism, which holds that the external world is independent of cognizing minds and that mental processes and ideas are by-products of physical events, and from subjective idealism, which conceives of reality as totally dependent on the consciousness of the subject and therefore relative to the subject itself.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conceptualism</span> Metaphysical theory

In metaphysics, conceptualism is a theory that explains universality of particulars as conceptualized frameworks situated within the thinking mind. Intermediate between nominalism and realism, the conceptualist view approaches the metaphysical concept of universals from a perspective that denies their presence in particulars outside the mind's perception of them. Conceptualism is anti-realist about abstract objects, just like immanent realism is.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scotism</span> Philosophical and theological system

Scotism is the philosophical school and theological system named after John Duns Scotus, a 13th-century Scottish philosopher-theologian. The word comes from the name of its originator, whose Opus Oxoniense was one of the most important documents in medieval philosophy and Roman Catholic theology, defining what would later be declared the dogma of the Immaculate Conception by Pope Pius IX in his constitution Ineffabilis Deus on 8 December 1854.

Philosophical realism is usually not treated as a position of its own but as a stance towards other subject matters. Realism about a certain kind of thing is the thesis that this kind of thing has mind-independent existence, i.e. that it is not just a mere appearance in the eye of the beholder. This includes a number of positions within epistemology and metaphysics which express that a given thing instead exists independently of knowledge, thought, or understanding. This can apply to items such as the physical world, the past and future, other minds, and the self, though may also apply less directly to things such as universals, mathematical truths, moral truths, and thought itself. However, realism may also include various positions which instead reject metaphysical treatments of reality entirely.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Quiddity</span> Essence or inherent nature of a person or thing (scholastic philosophy)

In scholastic philosophy, "quiddity" was another term for the essence of an object, literally its "whatness" or "what it is".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paul of Venice</span>

Paul of Venice was a Catholic philosopher, theologian, logician and metaphysician of the Order of Saint Augustine.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Representation (arts)</span> Signs that stand in for and take the place of something else

Representation is the use of signs that stand in for and take the place of something else. It is through representation that people organize the world and reality through the act of naming its elements. Signs are arranged in order to form semantic constructions and express relations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Haecceity</span>

Haecceity is a term from medieval scholastic philosophy, first coined by followers of Duns Scotus to denote a concept that he seems to have originated: the irreducible determination of a thing that makes it this particular thing. Haecceity is a person's or object's thisness, the individualising difference between the concept "a man" and the concept "Socrates". In modern philosophy of physics, it is sometimes referred to as primitive thisness.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Occamism</span> Philosophical and theological system

Occamism is the philosophical and theological teaching developed by William of Ockham (1285–1347) and his disciples, which had widespread currency in the 14th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Moderate realism</span> Concept in philosophy

Moderate realism is a position in the debate on the metaphysics of universals associated with the hylomorphic substance theory of Aristotle. There is no separate realm in which universals exist, nor do they really exist within particulars as universals, but rather universals really exist within particulars as particularised, and multiplied.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to metaphysics:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Formal distinction</span> Concept in scholastic metaphysics

In scholastic metaphysics, a formal distinction is a distinction intermediate between what is merely conceptual, and what is fully real or mind-independent--a logical distinction. It was made by some realist philosophers of the Scholastic period in the thirteenth century, and particularly by Duns Scotus.

Substantial form is a central philosophical concept in Aristotelianism and, afterwards, in Scholasticism. The form is the idea, existent or embodied in a being, that completes or actualizes the potentiality latent in the matter composing the being itself. For Aristotle, in fact, matter is the basis of all that exists; it comprises the potentiality of everything, but of itself is not actually anything. A determinate thing only comes into being when the potentiality in matter is converted into actuality; this is achieved by the substantial form. It is substantial because it is the principle by which a material kind of thing is recognised as such.

The principle of individuation is a criterion that individuates or numerically distinguishes the members of the kind for which it is given, that is by which we can supposedly determine, regarding any kind of thing, when we have more than one of them or not. It is also known as a 'criterion of identity' or 'indiscernibility principle'. The history of the consideration of such a principle begins with Aristotle. It was much discussed by the medieval philosopher Duns Scotus with his "haecceity" and later, during Renaissance, by Francisco Suárez (1548–1617), Bonaventure Baron (1610–1696) and Leibniz (1646–1716).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Medieval philosophy</span> Philosophy during the medieval period

Medieval philosophy is the philosophy that existed through the Middle Ages, the period roughly extending from the fall of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century until after the Renaissance in the 13th and 14th centuries. Medieval philosophy, understood as a project of independent philosophical inquiry, began in Baghdad, in the middle of the 8th century, and in France, in the itinerant court of Charlemagne, in the last quarter of the 8th century. It is defined partly by the process of rediscovering the ancient culture developed in Greece and Rome during the Classical period, and partly by the need to address theological problems and to integrate sacred doctrine with secular learning.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Duns Scotus</span> Scottish Franciscan friar and philosopher (c. 1265/66–1308)

John Duns Scotus was a Scottish Catholic priest and Franciscan friar, university professor, philosopher, and theologian. He is one of the four most important Christian philosopher-theologians of Western Europe in the High Middle Ages, together with Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, and William of Ockham.