عنوان مقاله [English]
Perhaps it can be said that throughout the history of philosophy what make the concept of universal problematic were its epistemic, ontological, and theological functions. Of course, such functions are the results of ultra-understanding in terms of logical views. In this regard, Avicenna's particular view of the natural universal, which in the light of its unconditional credentials emphasizes its nature and description of rationality, made it possible to compare with Hegel's concrete universal with the same description. Therefore, the relationship between the sensible, the rational world, the immateriality of the soul, the universal relationship with one's own individuals, and the problem of identity and individuality are among the issues that justify the functions. But what expresses the relationship between Hegel and Avicenna's thoughts in this article is, first of all, their focus on secondary or philosophical intelligibility of the universal and its functions- which have been shaped in the light of Aristotle- Platonic thoughts. Undoubtedly, in analyzing the universal and its determinations, both thinkers accepted its objective realization in its individuals but according to Hegel, the concretive universal in the term of Avicenna's philosophy is a mixed and conditioned essence of the thing which is presented on a level beyond the essence and being (i.e. the intellectual form) and appears a quite affirmative mode. Whereas what obscures the natural universal with its negative mode at the level of essence is how it exists. Moreover, Hegel analyzed the concrete universal and allowed the inference of plurality from unity, an inference that Avicenna opposes due to the principle of al-Wahid (rule of unity). Therefore, Hegel has finally fallen into the trap of conceptualism.