What
nominalism called in question is the universal, those principles and causes larger than the mechanism of nature or ideas generated out of nature seen as mechanistic by man.
Not exact matches
It must be stressed that the monadic view of reality that Whitehead and the phenomenologists share does not lead to
nominalism, but what might be
called a moderate realism.
The present Humanism, whether we
call it scientific or existentialist, is only the natural and nal culmination of those principles of autonomy and
nominalism in philosophy, which oversowed the New Learning.
That's different from what might be
called Progressive
nominalism; words are weapons to advance History, because particular people are nothing but Historical products and History fodder.
Our Court now affirms what might be
called Locke's «
nominalism.»
It's also different from what might be
called Darwinian
nominalism; words are weapons for the flourishing of the species because people, whether they know it or not, are basically species fodder.
In philosophy this would be
called Nominalism: the denial of mutual inter-definition both to be at all, and to be fulfilled rightly and beautifully, and in true order, in one's being.