Discuss your take on the notion of Universals. Discuss how a general understanding of the evolved throughout the middle ages. Which philosopher’s take do you feel is the most viable or why are they all off base?
Discussion Post 2
- Discuss Aquinas divisions of “law” and how this makes “knowledge” possible even in people who are not Christians. How reasonable do you see these divisions, and could they still be considered applicable today, why or why not?
Since you've specified two distinct discussion posts, I will address each one separately.
The notion of Universals grapples with one of philosophy's oldest and most persistent questions: What is the nature of shared properties, concepts, or qualities that appear to apply to multiple individual things? For instance, when we say "the sky is blue," "the ocean is blue," and "my car is blue," what is "blueness"? Is it something that exists independently of these blue things (Platonic realism), is it merely a name we give to similar things (nominalism), or does it exist in the particular blue things (Aristotelian realism/moderate realism)? This debate has profound implications for metaphysics, epistemology, and even ethics, as it touches on how we categorize the world, form knowledge, and even define abstract concepts like justice or humanity.