caa a22 4500 469039507 CHVBK 20180323132807.0 cr unu---uuuuu 170328e19920901xx s 000 0 eng 10.1007/BF00774420 doi (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/BF00774420 Marenbon John Trinity College, Cambridge aut Abelard, ens and unity [Elektronische Daten] [John Marenbon] Although Abelard arrived at a view ofens nearer to Aristotle's than his sources would suggest, unlike thirteenth-century thinkers he did not work out a view of transcendentals in terms ofens, its attributes and their convertibility. He did, however, regard unity (though not goodness or truth) as an attribute of every thing. At first, Abelard suggested that unity, being inseparable, could not be an accident according to Porphyry's definition (‘that which can come and leave a subject without the subject being corrupted'): either it is some type of form not classified by Porphyry, or not a form at all. In his later logical work, Abelard argued differently. Unity, he said, is an accidental form, but Porphyry's definition of an accident must be understood ‘negatively', not as asserting something about what could happen in reality (since the form of unity could never leave its subject) but rather something about an absence of connection: were it,per impossible, to occur, the loss by a subject of its form of unity would not lead to the loss of its specific or generic status. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1992 Topoi Springer Netherlands 11/2(1992-09-01), 149-158 0167-7411 11:2<149 1992 11 11245 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00774420 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI 1 research-article jats NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00774420 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 100 1- Marenbon John Trinity College, Cambridge aut NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- Topoi Springer Netherlands 11/2(1992-09-01), 149-158 0167-7411 11:2<149 1992 11 11245 Metadata rights reserved Springer special CC-BY-NC licence nationallicence BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-springer