Defense of the Faith by Cornelius Van Til
It may be profitable at this juncture to introduce the notion of a concrete universal. In seeking for an answer to the One-and Many question, philosophers have admittingly experienced great difficulty. The many must be brought into contact with one another. But how do we know that they can be brought into contact with one another? How do we know that the many do not simply exist as unrelated particulars? The answer given is that in such a case we should know nothing of them; they would be abstracted from the body of knowledge that we have; they would be abstract particulars. On the other hand, how is it possible that we should obtain a unity that does not destroy the particulars? We seem to get our unity by generalizing, by abstracting from the particulars in order to include them into larger unities. If we keep up this process of generalization till we exclude all particulars, granted they can all be excluded, have we then not stripped these particulars of their particularity? Have we then obtained anything but an abstract universal? As Christians we hold that there is no answer to these problems from a non-Christian point of view...It is only in the Christian doctrine of the triune God, as we are bound to believe, that we really have a concrete universal. In God's being there are no particulars not related to the universal and there is nothing universal that is not fully expressed in the particulars.
Source Evidence
Community verification
Help verify accuracy, sources, and attribution. Pick one action below — you don't need to fill out everything.
0 ratings
Rate this quote (sign in required)
Sign in to rate this quote and affect community trust scores.
Contribute
Choose what you want to add. Each option opens its own short form.
Discussion
Share context, ask questions, or discuss this quote. Comments are separate from source proposals and verification ratings.
No comments yet.