Also named[]
- Definition Manipulation
- Idea Manipulation
- Universalism
Introduction[]
Universalism is based on controlling something universal, thus being a metaphysical concept, idea, or essence common to all things that come together under the same linguistic sign. Next to the principle of universals is the Problem of Universals which is based on the question of whether universals really exist and if so what they are. To solve this there are several propositions that intend to explain universals and many of them treat them as something different. Because there are different opinions we will list here three simple explanations of what universals are, from here one can think of the other explanations which in the end are the explanations that are here, but applied more severely or less severely.
Type 1: Platonic Universalism[]
| “ | Universals are, in the tradition of Platonism, entities with ontological reality independent of the thinking mind, representing true reality. (...) Universals are mental abstractions, abstract concepts about individual and concrete things | „ |
| – Inês Lacerda Araújo (THE LOGOCENTRICISM OF THE WORLD'S REPRESENTATION, page 163 |
Plato declares that the most fundamental reality is composed of abstract but substantial ideas or forms. For him these ideas or forms are the only objects that can offer true knowledge. Such ideas would exist in the World of Ideas, known as hyperuranium, and not in the sensible world. This is an intangible world beyond which you want boundaries of the material world, including time and space. Everything in the world we perceive is actually an imperfect representation of the true form of reality.
Type 2: Aristotelian Universalism[]
In Aristotle's view universals exist only where they are instantiated; They exist only in things. They say there are ‘‘ ‘in re’ ’’, which means "in things", never separate from things. Having this principle the universal would be a shared characteristic existing in every thing. In this case what forms a universal would be each thing that is part of the set that it represents. An example would be red, redness would exist as long as there were red things, as long as there were no things with this characteristic the universal that represents it would no longer exist.
Type 3: Idealistic Universalism[]
This is one of the simplest explanations, for idealists universals are things that exist only in the mind, that is, they are not real outside the minds of rational beings. Thus universal properties would be a mental construct designed to describe common properties between physical constructs.
Nominalism and variations[]
It resembled idealism in denying the existence of any universal in both the material and the intangible worlds. Thus the common properties of tangible objects are only mental constructs used to represent physical things, these being the names A variation of nominalism is conceptualism that uses the term concept as its definition of properties, and they are universal in applying equally to all things in their extent in bearing meaning. An example of such a universal application would be that several words of different languages still have the same meaning, ie the same concept.
There are still other variations of nominalism, which are more or less severe in denying the existence of universals. All in all agree to say that the properties in common between material things are just something from the mind.
Type 4: Aristotelian Plateau Universalism[]
Although not a known thought, it is an explanation of the problem of universals that fits many fictional worlds. In this case universals would be both a separate entity that exists outside the sensible world, as well as its representation of the sensible world as part of its body.
For example in franchises like Marvel their abstract entities exist on all worlds being the idea they represent, but at the same time the most complete form of these entities lies on a higher plane inhabited only by such ideas.
Summary[]
Based on the above we can differentiate universals into three types and in each of these types this power performs a different act.
- Platonic universals: With universals existing in a higher world their manipulation would entail controlling a nonphysical existence on which physical existences depend to be as they are.
Aristotelian universals: Since universals are the physical set of what they represent, their manipulation would only amount to manipulating physical forms. Thus to manipulate the universal of matter would be to manipulate everything that has mass and occupies place in space. The application of this power is merely manipulation like any other, but to a "universal" degree. Idealistic, Nominalist, or Conceptualist Universals: Universals are just mental constructs used to refer to properties in common. So manipulating them would be equivalent to controlling the mind against such principles. Aristotelian Plateau Universals: The result would be a junction of the first two types. Although the result is the same for platonic manipulation, the difference between the two is necessary for the universals themselves. It should be noted that each universe of fiction must be rated according to how the franchise treats universals. It is possible to find universals by more common names as concepts or abstractions, although such definitions often do not agree with the origin of the term philosophically. Just as manipulating souls, the control of universals will only be effective if their symbolism also exists in the opposing universe, because if it does not exist there will be something to be manipulated.
Applications[]
Users[]
- Many characters from Marvel Comics
- Many characters from DC Comics
- Many characters from Umineko no Naku Koro Ni
pt-br:Manipulação de Universais