Stirner denied that any abstraction is real--he offered that hypostasizing any of them was to worship an unreal spook--every universal is only a name, a phantasm, unreal.
I believe in universal that redness is the form behind what is read, and horseness is the universal ideal behind the mammal called a horse.
It may be that certain numbers, formulas, combinations of symbolic or natural language (magic spells?) can actually reify a universal, while most verbal descriptions of words are just arbitrary audible and visual expressions assigned to represent by people a class of things that they are speaking about. Some other expression or term may serve to define or allude to the attriubted universal, but that in no way proves that universals do not exist.
No comments:
Post a Comment