Universals and Blood on the Hands of Reason: The Dispute over Meaning in Poland

Fundacja Dobre Państwo • January 8, 2026 • 🇵🇱 Polski

Universals: The Medieval Struggle for the Boundaries of Being

The debate over universals—whether general concepts (such as goodness or justice) exist in reality or are merely labels—forms the foundation of the modern order. If concepts possess real power, reason dictates the terms of the world; if they are only names, pure experience and cost-benefit calculations take control. This centuries-old conflict shapes our legal architecture, education, and emotions. Understanding its evolution allows us to recognize the mechanisms of manipulation in contemporary public debate and reclaim our intellectual sovereignty.

From St. Anselm’s Proof to the Kantian Revolution

St. Anselm’s proof, rooted in modal logic, attempted to derive the existence of God from the very definition of perfection. This was a pivotal moment where logic sided with faith, building a bridge between concept and being. The subsequent conflict between rationalism and empiricism became a struggle over the sources of power: Descartes and Spinoza sought truth in the geometry of reason, while Locke insisted it pass through the filter of experience.

Hobbesian nominalism brought radical political consequences—since universals are merely names, the sovereign gains the right to arbitrarily define order to prevent chaos. It was Immanuel Kant who finally established the limits of cognition, demonstrating that we do not discover objective reality but rather organize it using the mind's built-in categories. The Kantian dethroning of cognitive pride teaches us that we only perceive phenomena, not "things-in-themselves."

The Dialectic of History and the Crisis of Meaning

Hegel and Marx transformed philosophy into a historical process in which institutions and economics determine freedom. In this system, the state becomes a dense fabric of mutual recognition rather than just a collection of individuals. A counterweight to this paternalism is Mill’s harm principle, which protects the public sphere by allowing coercion only to prevent harm to others.

Nietzsche heralded the contemporary crisis of values by announcing the death of God. This was not an atheist manifesto, but a diagnosis of a fractured foundation of meaning, leading to nihilism and the dominance of interpretation over facts. The response came with Wittgenstein’s linguistic turn: truth and meaning are not a mist hovering over a sentence, but a practice embedded in "language games." The limits of our language define the limits of our world, and the hygiene of meaning requires silence regarding that which cannot be captured logically.

Conceptual Surgery and the Hygiene of Debate

To heal public life, we must restore scholastic disputation to education. Instead of training for standardized tests, schools should teach how to reach the essence of things and analyze underlying assumptions. In the media, a logic editor is essential—a role dedicated to distinguishing facts from evaluations and verifying the gravitas of terms like "treason" or "freedom."

In the legal system, conceptual surgery is necessary. An excess of exceptions and vague clauses destroys trust, turning the state into a cash register of discretion. Meanwhile, existentialism reminds us that truth must become the property of the individual—we bear radical responsibility for what we deem right. In everyday disputes, the remedy is hygienic eristic: demanding definitions, identifying falsification criteria, and ruthlessly separating the description of reality from the speaker's will to power.

Summary

In the thicket of information noise, it is easy to lose responsibility for the word. Can we find our way back to clarity of thought and integrity in debate? Linguistic precision is not an academic luxury but a safeguard of freedom. Without it, we are condemned to wander a labyrinth of interpretations, where every "truth" is merely a tool of dominance, and no one takes responsibility for the meaning of the sentences they utter.

📄 Full analysis available in PDF

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the dispute over universals in the context of Polish public life?

This is a fundamental debate about whether general concepts like justice have real power or are merely tools in the hands of those in power. The text suggests that a lack of faith in the reality of these concepts turns the state into a dictionary editor, where officials arbitrarily decide on reality.

What are the dangers of modern nominalism in the media?

Nominalism causes the media to treat names as tools of political warfare rather than as factual descriptions. This leads to a deficit of logic, where words with great weight, like treason, become empty memes used to polarize.

Why does the author consider education to be the key to repairing the public debate?

The current school often teaches enumerating definitions rather than understanding them, which fosters a sterile nominalism. The solution is to restore argument and dialectics, which force us to examine assumptions and precisely define terms before drawing conclusions.

What does Nietzsche's statement that God is dead mean in the context of the architecture of meaning?

This is not a theological manifesto, but a diagnosis of the fractured foundation of values that leads to nihilism. In a world without an objective guarantor of meaning, all that remains is the will to power and the struggle of contradictory interpretations, for which we must take responsibility ourselves.

What role does the late Wittgenstein play in linguistic hygiene?

Wittgenstein suggests identifying the meaning of words with their practical use in language games. Precision in the use of terms protects debate from gibberish and meaning inflation by setting limits on what can be meaningfully said.