This episode is a discussion with philosopher Damiano Costa about his paper “An Argument Against Aristotelian Universals.” Costa examines the Aristotelian view that universals really exist, yet depend for their existence on being exemplified by particular things, and he explains why he thinks this position cannot be sustained.

The discussion focuses on two arguments against Aristotelian universals. The first targets the idea that the existence of a universal is grounded in exemplification. Costa argues that if exemplification is a relation, then exemplification would require the prior existence of the universal itself, making it impossible for exemplification to ground that universal’s existence.

The second argument considers whether grounding universals in states of affairs or facts, such as “the apple is red,” can avoid this difficulty. Costa argues that this strategy also fails, since such facts involve universals as constituents, where constituents partly ground the fact in the first place.