What is the contradiction between Occam's razor and Duns Scott's nominalist teaching?

One Answer

1. Duns Scotus ' teaching was not nominalistic, but a classic example of realism, or to be more precise, moderate realism. Duns Scotus believed that universals exist objectively, but not in the form of Platonic ideas, but only in concrete things. For example, here is what A.V. Appolonov writes about it:

   Duns Scotus solved the problem of universals in a realistic way: general nature (natura communis) exists in reality, but only in “this” individual, limited (individualized) by “thisness” (haecceitas).

   Occam, on the other hand, adhered to nominalism. Occam's Razor was actually an argument in favor of nominalism: if we can avoid introducing additional assumptions, then we don't need to introduce them. Guided by this principle, Occam believed that general concepts exist only in our thinking, and in reality there are only individual things.

   That, in fact, was the difference between him and Duns Skot.

   Log in to Reply