Realism and Nominalism

A pair of opposite epistemological philosophical categories. Realism is a theory that takes objective existence, which is independent of human knowledge and consciousness, as the object of human knowledge. The opposite theory is nominalism. In philosophy, realism is a concept widely used but vague in meaning. Ordinary people believe in the objective existence of the external world in their daily life, which is called “naive realism”. Lenin pointed out that “The ‘naive realism’ any healthy person who has not been an inmate of a lunatic asylum or a pupil of the idealist philosophers consists in the view that things, the environment, the world, exist independently of our sensation, of our consciousness, of our self and of man in general.” Materialism deliberately makes the “naive” belief of mankind the foundation of its theory of knowledge. Different from “naive realism”, different philosophical schools differ dramatically in interpreting “realism”. Idealists define “universals” as independent spiritual entities that are primary, and specific other things as secondary—this is the spiritual “realism” of idealists; materialists believe that objective things are an existence independent of spirit, and matter is primary and consciousness is secondary—this is the material “realism” of materialists. The philosophy of realism has a long history in the west. Plato emphasized the independence and transcendental existence of essence or form Philo Judeaus a contemporary of Jesus evaluated regarded Plato’s formal existence as the spirit of God. Under the influence of neo-Platonism, Augustine combined philosophy with theology, regarding God as the core and faith as the premise, to systematically demonstrate the basic tenets of Christianity. He argued that the material world is temporary, the soul is eternal, and God is infinite and eternal beyond existence. Knowledge can only come from faith. Only by believing in its existence can one pursue it devoutly.

In the Middle Ages, with the formation of scholasticism, there were differences between nominalism and realism. Nominalism and realism both raised questions from the more realistic angle of “universal” or “individual”. Realism advocated that “universal” exists before “individual”, that “universal” is the only reality, and that “individual” or “special” is only a phantom. On the contrary, nominalism held that “individual” is the only reality, and “universal” or “universals” is only a name. It can be seen that whether “universal” is reality or name marked the fundamental difference between realism and nominalism at that time. Realism was conducive to maintaining the supremacy of religious authority and the rule of orthodox theology, which was appreciated and supported by the Pope. Nominalism won the applaud and esteem of secular landlords, royalty and citizens. Realism regarded itself as orthodox, regarded nominalism as “heresy” that deviated from the norm, and imposed cruel political persecution. From the 11th century to the 12th century, nominalism and realism confronted each other. Italian Bishop Anselm (1033-1109) called the theory of concept as entity “realism” or “extreme realism”. He used the same method to demonstrate Christianity’s belief in trinity, incarnation, virginity of Mary, original sin and so on, developing realism in an all-round way. He argued that God is real, and everything comes from the creation of God; believing in God is the most real thing, and the Pope is the representative of God on earth, and the church is God’s kingdom on earth, which are the most real. Realists claimed that the power of the Pope is absolutely higher than that of the king, the power of the church is absolutely higher than that of the state, and the church should take possession of and rule everything as a matter of course. Their belief thus became a theory for the church and hegemonism. French theolog Roscelin (1050-1124) opposed Anselm’s realism. He held that only individuals have reality, while “universal” and “universals” are only names or even sound or vibrations of air, without any reality. Although Roscelin’s nominalism split the whole and the part and was one-sided, he opposed the idea that “universal” determines individual things and showed a materialistic tendency. Roscelin’s student Abelard (1079-1142) was called a “moderate nominalist”. He used nominalism to study logic and focused especially on individual and general relations, refuting realism. He argued that “universals”, “universal” and “similarity” come from the idea of God in the final analysis; they exist in individual things, and only individual things exist. In this way, God is not something sacred or transcendent. “Universal” is only a thought and concept out of individuals and is not objective reality. Abelard denied uniqueness and absoluteness, and his nominalism played a progressive role in opposing Christian theology.

In the 13th century A.D., Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) stressed that “universal” is the most fundamental and real existence, whether as an idea, form or concept, and “individual” is only a creation of the “universal”. All “universal” or forms are given by God, who is the primary cause of things. Thomas Aquinas’ realism served theology, church and Pope’s privilege, and was a philosophical system hostile to the materialist world outlook. Since then, nominalists in the UK exerted the thought of nominalism in the struggle with Thomas Aquinas, which led to the gradual disintegration and decline of scholasticism. With the progress of social economy, the development of science and culture, the expansion of cities and the growth of citizens, nominalism launched a struggle against orthodox scholasticism on the new social basis. Roger Bacon, Duns Scotus and William of Ockham became the three famous nominalists in the UK at that time. They showed higher materialistic, empirical and individualistic tendencies philosophically, and proposed to oppose the religious power and support secular kingship politically. In The Holy Family, Marx and Engels affirmed the role that British nominalists played in facilitating the development of materialism. They emphasized that “Nominalism is a main component of English materialism and is in general the first expression of materialism. The real founder of English materialism and all modern experimental science was Bacon.” Marx and Engels pointed out that “In Bacon, its first creator, materialism contained latent and still in a naive way the germs of all-round development.” At the same time, they pointed out the defect of Bacon’s materialism—the aphoristic doctrine itself, on the other hand, was full of the inconsistencies of theology. Nominalism in the UK had obvious a tint of materialism, which dealt a heavy blow to the philosophical foundation, i.e., realism, of theology and ushered in the birth of new philosophy.

Aiming at the controversy between realism and nominalism in the history of philosophy, Lenin scientifically expounded the relationship between universal and individual from the height of dialectical materialism. He pointed out incisively that individuals must exist in conjunction with universals. Universals only exist in and through individuals. Any individual (no matter how) is universal. Any universal (one part, or one aspect, or the essence) is individual. Any universal only roughly includes all individual things. Any individual cannot be completely included in the universal, and so on. Lenin not only criticized the idealist view of realism, which regards universals divorced from individuals, but also overcame the metaphysical one-sidedness of nominalism, which denies the objectivity of universal things, thus enriching and developing the dialectical materialist theory of knowledge.