William of Ockham

← Encyclopedia

William of Ockham was an English Franciscan friar, theologian, and logician, active in the first half of the fourteenth century and counted among the most consequential thinkers of the late Middle Ages. The name fixes him to a village in Surrey; the work fixed him to a quarrel that would not let him alone. He trained at Oxford, lectured on the standard theological textbook of the day, and was summoned to the papal court at Avignon in 1324 to answer for opinions some of his readers found dangerous. While the inquiry into his writings was still open, he took up a separate and more explosive cause — the Franciscan insistence that Christ and the apostles had owned nothing — sided against the pope on it, and in 1328 fled north to the protection of the Emperor Louis of Bavaria. He spent the rest of his life in Munich, writing on the limits of papal power, and is thought to have died there around 1347, possibly in the plague.

Two things keep his name in circulation. The first is nominalism: the position that only individual things exist, and that the universal terms by which the mind groups them — humanity, whiteness, animal — are not features of the world but concepts, names that stand for many particulars at once. Against the realists, who held that such universals had some genuine existence, he argued that the world is exhausted by singulars, and that to multiply entities beyond these was to mistake the furniture of thought for the furniture of reality.

The second is the maxim that came to be called Ockham’s razor. He did not coin the polished Latin tag usually quoted for it, and the underlying rule of economy was old by his time; what he did was wield it relentlessly — that one should not posit more than the evidence and the argument require. In his hands it was a tool for cutting away the surplus metaphysics he thought earlier philosophy had let accumulate.

Underneath both lay a theology of the divine will. Ockham held that God’s freedom and power are unconstrained, that the moral and natural orders are as they are because God willed them so and could have willed otherwise, and that much of what reason had claimed to demonstrate about God belonged properly to faith. That separation — reason and revelation drawn apart rather than fused — unsettled the confident synthesis of the previous generation and shaped the disputes of the century that followed.

Later historians have made him a hinge figure, the point at which medieval thought is said to turn toward the modern: toward a sparer logic, a sharper line between what can be proved and what must be believed, and a suspicion of grand explanatory schemes. The reading is contested, and the razor has been credited with more than he ever cut. What is not in doubt is that he wrote to clear ground, and that a good deal of what came after was built on the cleared ground he left.

→ Related: Middle Ages · Neoplatonism