- Stewart criticizes Reid
- Stewart's scenario
- The realism professed until the 11th century was Aristotelian: it was the realism of fomes "immersed in matter" (realism of immanence)
- Roscelin broke the realist consensus by introducing a new doctrine inherited from Zeno, which Abelard took up and developed
- For Stewart, the "School of Zeno" is the ancestor of the medieval nominalist position
- The two nominalist theses of Roscelin and Abélard
- Conceptualism as a deviation from nominalism
- The two conceptualist theses
- The central point: the mind can reason about genera and species without the mediation of language
- Stewart admits to being embarrassed by a position he doesn't understand
- Stewart classifies Locke and Reid as conceptualists
- The topos of the "three families of medieval nominalism
- Stewart's sources: Brucker'sHistoria critica philosophiae, Daniel Morhof's Polyhistor
- Appearance of the word " conceptuales " ("conceptualists") in Brucker's writings
- Analysis of Brucker's texts: parallels between medieval "sects" and the schools of Plato, Aristotle and Zeno. Theory of the three states of the universal, and the "return of Stoicism
- Terms used by realists in polemics with nominalists(tyrones, verbales, terministae)
- First contact with Morhof. His embarrassment at "conceptualism
- His influence on Stewart
- Gérando's criticism of Stewart
- Gérando's scenario
- After Roscelin's radical nominalism, there were two sects of nominals: those who, with Abelard, were close to Aristotle, granting the universal a " fundamentum in re "; the others, the "conceptualists", who, abandoning Abelard's thesis, chose the path of the concept
- A critical examination of Gérando's sources, from Jean de Salisbury to Morhof.
11:30 - 13:00
