| Part of a series on |
| Blessed John Duns Scotus |
|---|
|
Scholasticism
Univocity Haecceity Immaculate conception Beatific vision Formal distinction hylomorphism Scotistic realism substance theory (Ousia) accident substantial form quiddity (essence / nature) Individuation Existence of God Christology Dunce cap Platonic realism Categories (Aristotle) Problem of universals Metaphysics Christianity and slavery |
|
Works
Opus Oxoniense
Tractatus de Primo Principio Quaestiones Quodlibetales |
|
Influences & People
Aristotle ("The Philosopher")
St. Paul ("The Apostle") Pseudo-Dionysius St. Augustine ("The Theologian") St. Boethius Avicenna Peter Lombard ("The Master") Averroes ("The Commentator") Maimonides ("Rabbi Moses") St. Albertus Magnus ("The Universal Doctor") St. Thomas Aquinas ("The Angelic Doctor") |
|
Philosophy Portal |
Scotist Realism, Sometimes called Scotist Formalism is Scotist position on the Problem of universals. This position emerged as a response to what was called the "problem of universals", which 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 Conceptualism of William of Ockham, and the earlier views of Abelard and others, which say universals exist only within the mind and have no external or substantial reality. [1][2]
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.[3]
Scotus denied these claims, in his Opus Oxoniense he argued that universals have a real and substantial existence [4]. 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 principle 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 [5]