.
William of Champeaux proposed another theory about Universalism which is indifference idealism stating if the accidents, referring to what makes us particular from each other, within people are stripped away, they will all be the same, pure beings which represent the Universal (Guilfoy). However, Peter Abelard refuted that theory by applying logic into it. He stated that if Plato is the universal, then it is in fact Plato that is predicated of Socrates when we say Socrates is human. Conversely if the species humanity is the individual then it cannot be a universal. Abelard asserted than an individual cannot be predicated of many.
Peter Abelard also proved the collective realism theory from Universalists to be wrong. Universalists believed that such species as humans or animals represented the Universe. Abelard answered that without a proper way to classify things into species and without a right and wrong way to classify them into species, anything grouped like Plato, a stone, and a bird together could constitute a species thus a universal (Guilfoy). That allowed Abelard to win his argument and prove that collective realism is not coherent to the theory of universalism. Peter Abelard's nominalism enabled him to win make his point against the Universalist at his time and become the core of his logic.
Peter Abelard's theory of language made him stands out as a master of language. Abelard theory of language was to explore the propositional content destined to establish a distinction between sentences whether they are affirmative or conditional. Abelard first distinguished the different words from a sentence by pointing out the difference between words and sentences. On an article from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Professor Peter king from the University of Toronto wrote that for Abelard, "The word refers to the item directly by naming or nominating it," and the sentence, "is a combination of words and so what is signified by the sentence is, in a qualified sense, composed of what is signified by words.
