EL PROBLEMA DE LOS UNIVERSALES EN BOECIO Y ABELARDO: CRÍTICAS A LA POSICIÓN REALISTA QUE CONSIDERA EL UNIVERSAL COMO UNA RES

Abstract

From the Commentary on Porphyryʼs Isagoge, the Roman philosopher Boethius has been a key figure in the introduction of one of the major topics of discussion in the philosophical thinking of the Middle Ages: we refer to the problem of universals. Thus, Boethius had a great influence on how the issue was addressed by the philosophers of the Medieval World and also the criticisms that could be made against the different stances. As far as this is concerned, we believe that it is possible to observe a line of continuity between the “aporetic” section of Boethiusʼ treatment about Porphyryʼs questions in his Second Commentary on Isagoge and the Peter Abaelardʼs criticism against the doctrines that maintain the idea of the universal as a res in the Logica Ingredientibus.

According to this, the purpose of this paper is to make a comparative study of the criticisms that Boethius and Abaelard expose against the realism in order to show similarities and differences between the philosophical thinking of both authors.