The essence of universals

Abstract

Since it is evident that discourse cannot be formed by means of a vocab ulary of proper-names only, the theory of the other constituents of language which includes the theory of universals, is connected with the classification of any vocabulary and with the description of different classes of words as to their significations. Many words are modifications of nouns and verbs, but they occur in a changed form as nouns and verbs too. Most words denote features of actual entities but not actual entities as do proper-names. Further we need for the completion of dis course the so-called logical vocabulary of any language which contains connectives or 'basic articles such as 'is', 'not', 'and', 'or', 'unless', 'if, 'than', 'neither', 'nor', 'some', 'all' '!). Plato in his Theory of Ideas postulated for the meaning of some con stituents of language reality the only kind of reality in the universe and if we begin with the doctrines of Greek Thinkers we may write History of Philosophy in terms of the discussion of the meaning of those constituents of language, which do not suffice, if used as single words, to denote actual entities. The discussion is not finished until to-day, and modern Philosophers think sometimes to conclude it by the remark that all differences of opinion may be reducible to differences in the definition of the concept 'universal' which is arbitrary in principle 2). Against Plato's opinion it may be pointed out that he has not seen that the universe which is the object of his theory is a universe of discourse only. His ideas are in fact transitory phenomena because human discourse is a transitory phenomenon created by man and a function of his mind. The so-called ideas are terms of human discourse and abstract in so far as they were undefined as to position in time and space, but not 'eternal objects', as Platonists maintain. If we speak on Universals, it must be noted, that the word 'universal' is