пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ-пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ

пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ-пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ, пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ, пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ. Abelard on Universals - пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ:пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ:09. 2007 пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ-пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ The Abelards solution of the problem of universals is neither a realistic no a nominalistic one, or, in other words, it is in the same degree nominalistic as it is realistic. пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ - Abelard on Universals пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ:пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ-пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: 09. 2007 пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: 23,3 K пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: 98563 пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ: 15Abelard on UniversalsBy Alexander KoudlaiIn this essay I shall attempt to show that in пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ-пїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅпїЅ the XII century there was a problem of relation of names to things and classes of things, or the problem of Universals. I shall also argue that Peter Abelard in his examination of the problem was neither a nominalist (contrary to J.