On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
thing , therefore , had this invisible upofcLeunenon , or subject , Or occult essence , and its categories . This fanciful but delusive system taken for granted , it was an easy step to suppose this invisible essence , or
upokeimenon , to fc > £ universal , and to be in all things the same $ and that bodies might be alike in this , and differ only in their accidental qualities The essence of Peter was , on this theory , the same as of John ; these two persons differed only in their categories or accidents . Butif this were allowed ,
it were no large extension of argument to add , that the essence of a dog is the same as that of a man , and that they differ also , only in their predicaments . One collection of outward and visible properties was a &og , and the other , a
iftan . But these are only names and words . The invisible universal upokeimenon is identical in both . Sueh , with particular modifications of individual professors , was the spirit of the theory of th 6 Vocalists , Nominalists , or Unjversalists , which we see went as
© ear to some of the worst theories of scepticism ^ as argument , contriving alsx > to be ostensibly decorous , could publicly advance . The Realists contended for the positive and real differences of things , individuals , essences and natures , as
well as properties , accidents and categories . The essential and invisible nature of Peter and John , of a man and * a quadruped ^ were , they maintained , as distinct and different as thfiic external-properties . The Realis ^ aj la ^ so much prevailed , that t \} & yiw&xsalists were forgotten , tijl Qccham revived them . Both
par-3 Tbi ^ sujij e ^ t ; forms , the sixteenth and seventeenth c ] fyap £ er £ . of , CkehamV logic , ^ hjch are vjsU > Jy le ^ ijed at Duns . Scotus . Qf * perus ^ g one , of the pri ncipal works of , IJlin ^ Scotus— -hjs ExactUsimae qnestignesjp . ^ ni y-ersamjogtfcam Arisfoleles-- ^
I observe . that he toginsuppn the r sjibj £$ t of the tTfiiversals , making Porphyry the basis , of . his questions . He then proceed ? * irith his . questions on most of Aristotle ' s vwrks- ^—Jii » predicftlneiils , peri hermenjas , ' elenchi , analytic ] , priores / posteriores .
His last '( question is an diflhuentein necesse ait spire omnia . F . 473 . According to his commentator , one object of Scotus was to distinguish , between the ens reale and the ens ralipjftia—God , angel ^ man , knowledge , colour , though lines , &c . Were entia r «» ( r * , TJw en * ratiowif -Is that whicli ha * no
Untitled Article
ties had their advocates anjj , th ^ ix aD . tagonists in England a § well as on- the Continent . But the perpetuall y e& > larging stream of experimental know
being extra animam , as a chimera , a g ^ id . en mouqtain , & . Q . —It is impossible to read these work&of the schoolmen without fee ) i ^ them to be but new modifications of the
works of the Arabian metaph ysicians Avicenna , Averroes and Al Gazel , go as deeply and as acutely through all the subtleties of the ens and the esse , and the categoriesj as Duns Scotus or Occham . In deed the dispute between the Universaligts and the Realists beg-an from the Arabians * for I observe that Al Gazel considers at
some length the division of being- , intp universal and particular . In this he discu 8 « e « one of the questions of Duns Scotus , whether phnes hominessunt iinus liomo— -rvrhptber many men are one man . The . ^ vrjj o rememfjer the discussion in Scriblerus , on the universal Lord Mayor , may like to know how a , n Arabian puts this knotty point .
u Some poisons , hearing what we say , that all menare one in humanity , and all blackness one >^ in blackness , have thought that univers ^ hblackness may be something frpn > wTiiph . any thing may te : an& that
aa universal man is something .- ; and tb ^ t an univiersaj soul i ^ spin e being " , one- in number , ^ and ? existingia all Doininalibu ^ - —as , p ^ e father in many > son ^ , one soil in many fields .
" This is the first error y for if the universal soul be one in number , and lie actually in Peter and John , and others ; and Peter were wise and John foolish ; it would ( follow that one soul may be at tbe s ^ i ae ti nje . skilled and ) ignorant in t&t saine-tl ^ iiuj' , v ^ h ^ icjl ^ i&jtnGonveniens .
u So if an iui ^ yei-6 a , l anirpal b * e one tiling i n , n urftb ^ r , apd be : at ; tnail y . i n m any indivitl ^ uils , it vvpui 4 . fp )] ow that the same anjmal may be a % the saw ^ time swimniing in the water , and waljcjng on two fee ^ 01 may be runnfng on four legjs . and flying * ifl the air ; which is incongruous .
c ^ -Un-iver 6 al being : is . th-erefore only in . the intellectibus of tk& thing of which th ^ sejisus . es . t . Ths iiUellexitreceives , thfi- farm ^ man , an ^ l t ^ certjtude of it when spi ^ e one individual th ^ ng- is . proposed to it , &fW ' wards if it should see another ,, a . nty 1 ^* pV ^ ssipn does , not take pla . ee , bu ^ reni ^ the f , same as before;—so if he saw . three . or four .
" Men , singly takejn ^ d , o » npf . diffiwr M * each other in a ny ^ way inliuniLanity . fttfA he should afterward ^ se .. e a . wojjf , the . n . s ^ quidditas , anlj h another image ( d « p ? J ^?' different frpttV % n >§ t ^ ^ pul < . > P ^*' hitn ^ . " The u *\ ye ^ 1 ikfflfQ& + ' , wfo ™ £ isth $ u ^ iver ^ &jfa r i ^ AfLWtot * # * th ^ infen ^ ual ^ t Wt i KHtm ^^ *
Untitled Article
^ 10 History of the Scholastic Philosoph y *
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1815, page 210, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1759/page/10/
-