Plato's Metaphysics: The Conflict between Universals and Particulars

627 Words2 Pages
The conflict between universals and particulars boils down to whether or not a universal can exist without being manifest as a particular. For Plato, universals are paramount to particulars. The world of the forms is distinct from the illusory mundane world upon which our senses depend. Universals are in fact more real than the particular forms they might inhabit. Plato's metaphysics allows much more firmly for a worldview like that shared by Eastern religions like Hinduism, in which the transitory world of our senses is overshadowed by an unseen dimension that transcends space, time, and even human consciousness. Moreover, Plato's metaphysics make it easier to understand intangibles like emotions. However, the Platonic worldview is limited too. Particulars are often the only way philosophers can relate to universals. Aristotle's metaphysics allow for the existence of universals without negating the importance of the particulars. Particular, individual manifestations are usually the only way a human being can recognize that a universal form exists. How would it be possible to know that love exists without being able to quantify the sensations of love or the existence of actions like affection or altruism? The best way to resolve the conflict between universals and particulars would be to synthesize them. It is important to allow for the coexistence of universals and particulars. Science depends on an appreciation for particulars, but it also strives for broad
Open Document