Abstract

Medieval discussion of issues relative to the origin of the famous Bofei interest issues. However, in the Middle Ages, the first real phase of the issues were the only clear conclusion regardless of the name is Uncle Seoul pull its people. Arbor pull Seoul to follow sub-km total phase of the definition of Aristotle, and Aristotle's metaphysics that sub-km out into a pure logic that the state, stated that the total phase is that many individual things, words. He passed on cattail of Viagra Against Corruption of it regardless of criticism, denied any widespread or common things exist, therefore, he saw the future, capable of many individual things from that described the role of what can only be words, so really established In order to he regardless of the nominalist stance. However, Arbour pull Seoul that the words were still significant relative to words. Arbor Seoul pull through his unique and abstract state regardless regardless that the total phase of the meaning of words is that the common concept of what it means. According to this theory of meaning, the only name Arbour pull Seoul regardless regardless concept actually is. Interpreted with this in detail Arbor pull logic Seoul's famous book "logic preliminary" based on the Arbor pull Seoul regardless philosophy of nominalism In order to make the system described. Medieval discussions on universals can be traced back to Porphyry's first formulation of the problem. However, it is Peter Abelard who first really made a definitely nominalist response to the problem. Through both abiding by Aristotle's classic definition of a universal, and transforming its metaphysical into pure logical predication, he holds that universals are what are predicated of many individual things. By criticizing William's realism, which commits itself to real universals being common to many individual things, he insists on depriving many individual things of any common or universal essence that could exist in reality. In his opinion, therefore, instead of any things, universal or individual, there can only be universal words, or names that can be predicable of many individual things, and his theory of nominalism is thereby established: Universals are words or names which we can predicate of many things. Never the less Abelard thinks that universal words are still meaningful. And with the aid of his distinctive status-thesis and abstractism, both of which are so important that there are necessary lengths to which this paper goes to articulate them in great detail, Abelard suggests that the meaning of a universal word consists in the common conception it signifies. According to this theory of meaning, this kind of nominalism is the exact equivalence of conceptualism. Based on a careful understanding of his main work on universals: Logica ingredientibus, the present paper tries to give a systematical account of Abelard's philosophical thoughts of nominalism