The lectures this week introduce two New Urban Institutions - The Commune and The University.
Communes took many forms and thus defining them is difficult, but
broadly speaking, they were the established allegiances among the
citizens of a town for their mutual governance and benefit. They first
arose in the late 11th and early 12th centuries and became increasingly
popular after that. There was a strong concentration of them in central
northern Italy.
.jpg) |
| factional defensive towers in San Gimignano |
|
The late 11th and early 12th centuries was also the time when the first
universities were established. The first university seems to have been
established at Bologna in 1088 and it was not until c.1150 that the
University of Paris first opened its doors, with Oxford opening shortly
later in c.1167.
 |
| meeting of doctors at the University of Paris |
The secondary reading for this week is taken from Edward Peters'
Europe and the Middle Ages
and deals with the cultural and historical changes associated with the
new University, while the primary material deals with one of the early
university's pin up boys, Peter Abelard and his misfortunes.
 |
| the tomb of Abelard and Heloise |
The Blog Question:
What does Peters mean when he says (p.267) that "Abelard himself adopted a modified nominalist position".
.jpg)
Concerning the debate of realism and nominalism, Abelard chose a more immediate stance between the two extreme metaphysical views.
ReplyDeleteHis philosophy works tend to lean more towards a nominal view of universals (that is simply, 'truths', or categorised universals, are not eternal principles but merely changeable human constructs) but shows that he had a 'modified' position from the traditional nominalist view.
While he agrees with the traditional nominalist that universals do not exist independent of particulars (or humans, to simplify the matter), he differs because he believes a form of universals do exist, only INSIDE particulars, but as an abstract mental construct. His abstract 'universals', though they are just mental constructs (as opposed to the realist's eternal truth) WILL have meaning (as opposed to the nominalist's view of 'meaningless' changeable constructive 'truths'). He does argue though, that as humans, we cannot really accurately distinguish and discern between the eternal universals in our minds and the social changeable constructs invented outside of our minds (by social, cultural, political impacts etc).
Peters means that Abelard was a nominalist and with this nominalist approach he used logic and reason to criticize all non- secular works. He wrote “Sic et Non” the manual in which he proves the contradictions in church writings. This work was approached with use of reason and faith in order to come to a truth. As a nominalist truth is discovered by the study of individual items. Abelard applies just that as he took the material universe as a truth and all other ideas as debateable. However as Peter said he was modified, in that he did not completely neglect the universal point of view. He said that universals exist, but they exist within the individual. If one believes in a universal truth then it shall be.
ReplyDeletePeters is saying that Abelard does generally side with nominalists, but he is by no means a traditional nominalist. As previously mentioned, a traditional nominalist would insist that universals do not exist. As Peters mentions, Abelard's contributions to make him one of the most original Europena thinkers - Peters notes that Abelard "widened the concept of the human personality". That is to say, Abelard put a lot more emphasis on our intentions in regard to good and evil than did his contemporaries.
ReplyDeleteWhen Peters says that "Abelard himself adopted a modified nominalist position", he is suggesting that Abelard agreed with the idea that truth could be discovered through the study of individual things and material creation. However he also suggests that Abelard had a 'modified' take on nominalism which is clear from his works Sic et Non and Eithics, Know Thyself. In Sic et Non he focusses on a logical method of understanding oneself and ones own relationship with God, a higher power. While in Ethics he he leads the way into the philosophy of human intention. In both these works Abelard shows and understanding of both realism and nominalism.
ReplyDeletePeters may have been referring to the idea that Ableard, although
ReplyDeletelooking for truths in 'individual things' (studies of other scholars
and written documents: The Bible)he also looked for truths in the
thoughts of other people, being a more universal source. His ideas
based on the 'intetnion and consent' reflect the importance of our own
moral thoughts and the 'contrition and sorrow for sin' personal
reflection on the way we should live our lives. This represents
a more realist concept(as realists focus on the universal?). He also
draws attention to Ableard's critque of other Scholrs works and how
they contradict themselves and the Bible, which is more a study of
individual aspects and therefore nominal. This combination of his
thinking imply what Peters referred to as a 'modified' nominalist
perspective.
I don't really understand quite what is going on and may have got the
concepts quite mixed up.
Abelard stated that "nothing can be believed unless it is first understood", which forms the basis of the nominalism approach; we must study and observe individuals objects before we can discover the truth. Peters refers to Abelard as modified nominalist, in that he did not adopt an entirely nominalist view, but rather approached life with a philosophical/ethical perspective as well. This is evident through Abelard's writing, such as 'Sic et Non' and 'Ethics'. In his work 'Sic et Non', he discusses the idea of exploring faith and the ties between God and his people, in order to discover the truth. Abelard seem as though he was looking at both sides of the story, adopting a view that was based on the scientific and philosophical approach to life.
ReplyDeletePeters means that Abelard took an approach which followed Nominalist principles, but he also had respect for secular works (as shown in the quotes: "nothing can be believed unless it is first understood", and "Abelard stated that contrition, internal sorrow for sin, was the first essential stage of penance")
ReplyDeleteI hope I have interpreted this right..!
Nominalism is, according to Edward Peters, the argument that it is only through studying individual things that one can find the truth. As Peters explains, this view differs from others of its time, including universalism (the belief that these individual things are of a lesser reality than the ideas ‘in the mind of God’), and that of Aristotle (that ‘only individual things have reality’). When Peters states that Peter Abelard ‘adopted a modified nominalist position’, he means that Abelard held to some nominalist beliefs, while he also held some others.
ReplyDeleteThese differing views are evident in The story of his misfortunes, when Abelard remarks that he convinced his teacher William that ‘the whole [universal] species’ was ‘the same not in essence but through non-difference.’ This comment suggests that Abelard acknowledges the reality of the universal, as well as individual things. Also, as some other people have hinted, it was Abelard’s vision of a combined faith and rationality that diverged from a nominalist approach; even though Abelard perceived contradictions in religious scripture (the individual things), he recognised their truth as a whole package of ‘faith’.
A decidedly more Aristotelian approach, a modified nominalist position would perhaps indicate that Abelard believed that existence and the nature of truth was predicated of real, material things, but it was not absolute. Truth, as explored by Abelard (particularly in his comparisons of Scripture and the writings of the Church in Sic et Non) may assume a more diverse understanding than simply material, 'real' things, and may involve the workings of God's hand. However, one thing that Abelard made clear in his beliefs was that regardless of the approach to the truth, any truth needs a basis in logic.
ReplyDeletePeters is saying that while Abelard agreed with the nominalist idea that the truth can be found in material things, Abelard did not deny the existence of universals. This is evident in Abelard's writing "Sic et Non" in which he correlates people's understanding of themselves and their relationship with God, both of which are immaterial entities, with the process of identifying truth.
ReplyDeleteWhen Peter’s wrote the line “Abelard himself adopted a modified nominalist position” he intended it to mean that although Abelard does show some nominalist views he does not agree with them entirely. He does agree that you can discover the truth through the study and observance of individual objects, but he did not believe this was the only way. He adopted this view and extended it to a more religious view. Through his works Ethics, Know Thyself and the Sic et Non he proposed that it was the importance of human intention in any estimate of the gravity of a sin or the virtue of a good act. This means that he did have strong views behind his works as well as the view that you can discover truth by using study and observation.
ReplyDeleteWhat does Peters mean when he says (p.267) that "Abelard himself adopted a modified nominalist position".
ReplyDeletePeters means, when he states, that "Abelard adopted a modified nominalist position", that he considered both the notions of Nominalism and Realism to be valid. Although he agreed that truth could be discovered through the the study of individual things and material creation, he also believed that the truth could be discovered through the contemplation of Universals, he adopted a middle position between the two. Abelard shows through his works "Sic and Non' as well as "Know thyself" that there is a connection between the theological basis of the time, an emphasis of God's love of humanity and the need for humans to participate in achieving their own salvation, with the idea of the human intention in the an action of virtue and good next to sin. Intention and his later thesis that contrition, or internal sorrow for sin being the first step towards redpemption and penance, ecompasses Abelard's modified position, these things are of a universal manner.
When Peters claims that Abelard adopted a modified nominalist position, he is referring to the debate between nominalism and realism. Given Abelard’s works, Ethics and Sic et Non, it is apparent that he relied more on logic and reason than pure faith. As such, it is unlikely that Abelard would follow realism, which stated that truth could only be found through contemplation of universals – the ‘true’ forms of individual things, as imagined by God. At the same time, however, Peters is not portraying Abelard as a pure nominalist, who, unlike a realist, would believe that truth can only be found through the study of the material, rather than the universal.
ReplyDeletePeters is claiming that that Abelard, for the most part, follows the doctrine of nominalism, but not entirely – to some extent, Abelard was influenced by realism.
What does Peters mean when he says (p.267) that "Abelard himself adopted a modified nominalist position".
ReplyDeleteAbelards doctine of logic and reason allowed him to combine elements of both nominalism and realism within his ideology. Abelard applied his own ideologies on the study of faith, theology and life which while leaning towards nominalism remained always unbalanced by his own philosophy.