II. The Universal Concept, Formally Considered (2)

1.2. Nature of the universal

a) The various modes of universality

The Latin word 'universale' can be understood as 'unum versus alia', 'one versus others'. It therefore means one thing in relation to a plurality of others. Just as there are various modes of being in relation to other things, so there are various meanings of the term 'universal'*:

Universal
-----cognitive
----------linguistic: universale in dicendo [1]
----------logical: universale in praedicando [2]
-----ontological
----------essential: universale in essendo [3]
----------causal: universale in causando [4]


Let us explain these briefly:

[1] The universale in dicendo (it is also called the universale in significando, but this formulation can generate confusion, since not only is the term significative, but also the concept) is something 'one' insofar as it is a unique sign with respect to the plurality of meanings to which it refers. More precisely, it is about the categorematic linguistic term, which signifies a plurality of things, by means of the universal concept**. for example, the terms 'homo', 'man', 'hombre', 'uomo', 'Mensch', etc, refer to the plurality of men by means of the concept of 'man'.

[2] The universale in praedicando is something 'one' which by its very nature is capable of being predicated, as a concept, of a plurality of subjects:

universale est quod est aptum natum de pluribus praedicari.
EPH 1, lect. 10, n. 119; Cf. Aristotle, Peri Hermeneias 7, 17 a 39-40.

For example, the concept of 'man' is capable of being attributed to all the singular men.

[3] The universale in essendo is something 'one' which by its nature is capable of being in a plurality of beings:

universale est quod est pluribus inesse.

For example, human nature has a certain unity and is capable of being in a plurality of men.

[4] The universale in causando is something 'one' whose causality extends to a plurality of effects. The causal universal par excellence is God, whose subsisting being creates all beings by participation (Cf. Cf. SM, prœm.: "... substantiæ separatæ sunt universales et primæ causæ essendi.").


Logic formally studies [2], because second intention of predicability is a part of its formal object. But such a relation of predicability being always expressed in a linguistic term, and being always ultimately founded in things, logic should also take into consideration [1] and [3]. The investigation of the univeral in causando, on the other hand, in no way pertains to logic, but rather to philosophical theology (The philosophies of Plato and Hegel can be characterized, as to their structure, as two possible attempts to make the universal in causando coincide with the universal in praedicando).

* on these various meanings, cf. John of St Thomas, Ars logica II, q. 3, art. 1, 313 b 8 - 314 b 17.

** Cf. EPH 1, lect. 10, n. 121: ; "quando autem denominatur res ab eo quod est commune sibi et multis aliis, nomen huiusmodi dicitur significare universale, quia scilicet nomen significat naturam sive dispositionem aliquam, quae est communis multis". One can clearly see that the universal term signifies by means of the universal concept.