Before Kant. Universals in German Enlightenment

In this paper, I argue that Kant rejects universals and accepts tropes instead. Nonetheless, he explicitly situates himself between nominalism and realism. In analyzing the sparse texts dealing with universals, I consider the notion of ‘universal things’ and compare it with the early modern debate about universals, but hold that this cannot ultimately decide whether or not Kant rejects universals. I then consider an argument from the change of properties in substances and argue that Kant’s account of it is incompatible with universals. In the end, I consider why Kant takes issue not only with realism, but also with nominalism.

2

2017

The ideas in your mind, where did they come from. did they exist at your birth or you acquired it later. This paper is the middle age understanding of that concept.

The concepts of particular and universal have grown so familiar that their significance has become difficult to discern, like coins that have been passed back and forth too many times, worn smooth so their values can no longer be read. On the Genealogy of Universals seeks to overcome our sense of over-familiarity with these concepts by providing a case study of their evolution during the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, a study that shows how the history of these concepts is bound up with the origins and development of analytic philosophy itself. Understanding how these concepts were taken up, transfigured, and given up by the early analytic philosophers, enables us to recover and reanimate the debate amongst them that otherwise remains Delphic. This book begins from the early, originating texts of analytic philosophy that have hitherto baffled commentators, including Moore's early papers, and engages afresh with the neglected contributions of philosophical figures that historians of analytic philosophy have mostly since forgotten, including Stout and Whitehead. This sheds new light upon the relationships of Moore to Russell, Russell to Wittgenstein, and Wittgenstein to Ramsey.

Fichteana, Review of J.G. Fichte Scholarhip, Vol. 23

Rivista Italiana di Filosofia Analitica Junior, 2010

The three-day conference opened in the afternoon of July, 5 and, after taking a quick look at the programme and the names of the important thinkers standing out on it, one could have expected to find a crowded audience room. Actually that was not quite the case.

2018

ABSTRACT The problem of universals remains a philosophical theme not only in ontology but also in epistemology. In Husserl, there are particular universals, the noematic 'X', the identical, and universals stricto sensu, atemporal universal names. In this paper, I present the theme as it is analyzed by Husserl in Ideas I. In the first section, I describe the trajectory to the universals highlighting the parallelism between noese and noema. In the second section, I draw the reflection of this problem on the philosophy of language which is also affected by the noetic-noematic correspondence. In the third and last section, I show how the investigation about the universals moves in the noematic sphere, and conclude defending the possibility of reaching the universal strict sense departing from the noematic 'X'.

The Epoch of Universalism (1769-1989), 2021

2019 witnessed the 30th anniversary of the German reunification. But the remembrance of the fall of the Berlin Wall coincided with another event of global importance that caught much less attention: the 250th anniversary of Napoleon Bonaparte’s birth. There is an undeniable historical and philosophical dimension to this coincidence. Napoleon’s appearance on the scene of world history seems to embody European universalism (soon thereafter in the form of a ‘modern’ imperial project); whilst scholars such as Francis Fukuyama saw in the events of 1989 its historical fulfilment. Today, we see more clearly that the fall of the Berlin Wall stands for an epistemic earthquake, which generated a world that can no longer be grasped through universal concepts. Here, we deal with the idea of Europe and of its relation to the world itself. Picking up on this contingency of world history with an ironic wink, the volume analyses in retrospect the epoch of European universalism. It focusses on its dialectics, polemically addressing and remembering both 1769 and 1989. L’année 2019 a été marquée par le 30e anniversaire de la réunification de l’Allemagne, éclipsant un autre événement d’envergure mondiale : le 250e anniversaire de Napoléon Bonaparte. La dimension philosophico-historique de cette coïncidence ne peut pourtant pas être négligée : si l’arrivée de Bonaparte sur la scène de l’histoire mondiale semble incarner l’avènement de l’universalisme européen (bientôt amené à prendre sa forme « moderne » et impériale), certains penseurs ont suggéré, avec Francis Fukuyama, que « 1989 » marquait son accomplissement historique. Aujourd’hui, il apparaît au contraire que la chute du mur de Berlin a été un véritable tremblement de terre épistémique, et rendu inopérants les concepts universels. Dans le monde d’après, c’est à l’idée d’Europe et à sa relation au monde que nous avons affaire. Revenant par un geste ironique sur cette contingence historique, le présent volume se veut une analyse rétrospective de l’époque de l’universalisme, dans toute la dialectique que les commémorations de 1769/1989 ont fait surgir. With contributions by Leyla Dakhli, Valérie Deshoulières, Emmanuel Droit, Tammy Lai-Ming Ho, Christopher M. Hutton, Avi Lifschitz, Hans-Jürgen Lüsebrink, Markus Messling, Sarga Moussa, Christiane Solte-Gresser, Sergio Ugalde Quintana etc.

The Epoch of Universalism: 1769–1989, 2021

Starting with the times of Napoleon Bonaparte and the nexus between European universalism and imperialism, ending with the 1989 scenario and its global implications, this essay analyses the ends of European universalism. It does so in a double sense by addressing its interests and objectives, as well as the end of its legitimation in the times we live in. Through amontage of historical and philosophical constellations from1769 to 2019, ranging fromGoethe and Champollion to Max Lingner and Frantz Fanon, Alain Mabanckou and Camille de Toledo, it seeks to understand the promises and hopes that universalismwas carrying, as well as the deceptions and losses that were caused by its epistemic implication in power relations. The history of universal progress entails a dialectics of contestation and provincialisation, both in a European and in a global perspective. If 1989 has left us with an end of utopia, then we need to understand this history to draw hope for a minor universality.