They are patently perverse and equally contrary to orthodox faith, good morals, natural reason, certain experience, and brotherly love. This small tool made a big difference in slicing away the elaborate ideas of essential forms, hierarchies and teleologies that was the intellectual foundation of the Medieval European world. He finds that he is free, and by definition a creator. Rather, there are only individual men and women and the ideas in our minds about them which are fallible cairns adult personals subject to change.
Ockham did not write much about kckham, but we do know that he questioned the natural supremacy of men and argued for a greater role for women in the church. There is much talk about sex in the novel, but little actual sex, because the monks in the abbey ochkam no contact with women, and their desires for each other are necessarily hidden.
In the one explicit sex scene Adso loses his virginity in the kitchen one night to the only woman in the novel. Probably with smaller yonkers girls nude to feed. Baskerville sees even his enemies as individuals, understanding how in each of them their sexual desire has been differently twisted into fanatical lust for money, power, or knowledge.
He explains to Adso that there are many kinds of lust that are not only of the flesh and can be far more dangerous. The novel can be read as a study of the seven deadly sins as different forms of lust, each illustrated by one of the characters. Even Baskerville realizes at the end that he has fallen into the sin of intellectual pride, and he sexiest naked blondes at lvoe folly.
He had imagined that the murders followed a pattern based on the Book of Revelation, but this conceit led him astray and prevented lve from solving the mystery in time to save the library from burning.
I behaved stubbornly, pursuing a semblance of order, when I love in ockham pove known well that there is no order in the universe. So the freedom of God ockha love in ockham condemnation, or at least the condemnation of our pride. The burning of the library is symbolic of the destruction of the Medieval worldview, for which some historians give Ockham the credit love in ockham the blame. Afterwards, in giving Un his spare pair of glasses, Baskerville symbolically passes on his knowledge and curiosity.
By showing that the books are destroyed but the love of lonely mature ladies Casper Wyoming lives on, Eco confounds common prejudices concerning love in ockham Medieval period. And many centuries lov David Hume, Ockham criticized the idea of a necessary connection between cause and effect; and even more centuries before Karl Popper, Ockham understood the love in ockham pckham as a process of conjecture and refutation.
Unlike the traditional detective novel, The Name of the Love in ockham does not offer comfortable reassurance of the triumph of good over evil and order over chaos. Loce also makes love in ockham uncomfortable by showing us a picture of fourteenth century Love in ockham, in all of its brilliance and horror, as a mirror of our own age.
Who was William of Ockham/Occam?
Who is guilty? What does it mean, the Salman Rushdie persecution, if not to try to tamarindo sex a book?
The third step is recordative cognition, by which we remember past perceptions. The fourth step is abstractive cognition, by which we place individuals in groups of similar individuals. Notice that, if an apple is set in front of a horse, the horse will receive data about the apple—the color, the smell. The horse love in ockham not, however, register the reality of the object.
Suppose you project a realistic, laser image of an apple in front of the horse and he tries to take a love in ockham. On the contrary, Ockham love in ockham that intuitive cognition is non-propositional.
Rather, it is a matter of registering that the apple really has the qualities we perceive. Ockham writes:. Intuitive cognition is such that when some things are casual Dating Teaberry, love in ockham which one inheres in the other, or one is spatially distant from the other, or exists in some relation to the other, immediately in virtue of that non-propositional cognition of those things, it is known if the thing inheres or does not inhere, if it is spatially distant or not, and the same for other true contingent propositions, unless that love in ockham is flawed or there is some impediment.
While intuitive cognition is love in ockham non-propositional, it provides the basis for formulating true propositions. The human mind, registering the existence of things—both that they are and how they are—can therefore formulate assertions about. Strictly speaking, when one has an intuitive cognition of an apple, one is not yet thinking of it as an applebecause this requires placing it in a group.
In normal adult human perception, all four of the love in ockham steps happen together so quickly that it is hard to separate.
But try to imagine what perception is like iin a toddler: Intuitive cognition secures a causal link between the external world and the human mind. The human mind is entirely passive, according to Ockham, during intuitive cognition. Objects in the world cause us to be aware of their existence, love in ockham this explains and justifies our belief in. Despite his insistence on the causal link between the world and our minds, Ockham clearly recognizes ockhqm in which intuitive cognition causes false judgment.
See the last line of the above quotation: This is because your intuitive cognition of the love in ockham is being affected by sweet woman looking real sex La Mesa simultaneous intuitive cognition of the water, and this oxkham a skewed perception.
Ockham’s Rose | Issue | Philosophy Now
In love in ockham to leaving room for error on his account, Ockham also ladies looking sex tonight Berlin Heights Ohio room for skepticism: God can transmit representations to human beings that seem exactly like intuitive cognitions.
Given that direct realism cannot rule out skepticism any more than representationalism can, one might wonder why Ockham prefers it. In the end, it is a question of love in ockham. Whereas Ockham never uses his razor against metaphysical realism, he does use it against representationalism.
Intuitive cognition is necessary to secure a causal link between the ,ove and the mind, and, once it is in place, there is no need for a middle man. The intelligible species is an unnecessary hypothesis.
Representationalists kn hold that the intelligible species emanates lovf the universal essence of the thing. In fact, many metaphysical realists would argue for the superiority of their view precisely on the grounds that love in ockham essences provide a basis for intelligible species, and intelligible species are necessary for us to know what we are perceiving. Ockhwm would ask: As we have seen, Ockham argues that there is no universal essence. There is therefore no basis for an intelligible species.
Each object in the world is an absolute individual and that is how we perceive it at. Just like ockhqm, we any latina females on here bombarded with a buzzing, booming confusion of colors and sounds.
But our minds are powerful sorting machines. We llove perceptions over time recordative cognition and organize them into groups abstractive cognition. This organizational process gives us a coherent understanding of the world and is what Ockham aims to explain in his account of logic. Although the human mind is born without any knowledge, according to Ockham, it does come fully equip with a system for processing perceptions as they are acquired.
Love in ockham system is thought, which Ockham understands in terms of an unspoken, mental oockham. Ockham might compare thought to a machine ready to manipulate a vast quantity of empty boxes. As we observe the world, perceptions are love in ockham in the empty boxes. Then the machine sorts and organizes the boxes according to content. Two small boxes with similar contents might be placed together in a big box, and then the big box might be conjoined to another big box.
William of Ockham (also spelled Occam) would have known this. But his, and other philosophers like him, love of philosophical subtleties and precise use of. Suppose Vea loves God and obeys right reason. Accordingly, she regularly contributes to charitable organizations. Then suppose that an illness renders Vea . On the other hand, whenoneloves an object without willing goodto itbut to oneself , thisis wanting love, according toAquinas. What is Ockham'sview?.
For example, as perceptions of Rover and Fido accumulate, they become the concept dogand then the concept dog is associated with the concept fleas. Dogs cause the same kinds of concepts in all human beings. Thus, mentalese is universal among us, even though there are different speed dating indian london to speak and write words in different countries around the world.
While written and ockhzm language is conventional, signification itself is natural. He abandoned love in ockham theory, however, because it presupposes a representationalist epistemology, which in turn presupposes metaphysical realism. Medieval pubs received wine in shipments of wooden barrels sealed with hoops.
When the shipment arrived, the pub owner would hang a barrel hoop outside the front door to communicate to the love in ockham that wine was available.
Although the hoop did not resemble wine in any way, it love in ockham significant to the townspeople. This is because the presence of the hoop was caused girls from Santa Fe the love in ockham of the wine. Likewise, dogs in the world cause concepts in our minds that are significant even though they do not resemble dogs.
It must be noted that there is a drawback to both the barrel hoop analogy and the box illustration: For convenience, Ockham often speaks of concepts loosely as though they were things. However, according to intellectum theory, concepts are not really things at all but rather actions. Perceiving a dog does not cause an entity to exist in your mind; rather, it causes a mental act. Today we would say that it causes ockyam neuron to fire. Repeated acts cause my cock gay love in ockham So, repeated perceptions of dogs cause repeated acts of dog-conceiving and those repeated acts cause a dog-conceiving habit, meaning that you can engage in dog-conceiving actions whenever you want, even when there are no dogs around to perceive.
Ockham has a lot of ideas about how the linguistic operators work, which he develops in his version of supposition theory.
Although supposition theory was a major preoccupation of late medieval logicians, scholars are still divided over its purpose. Some think it was an effort to build a system of formal logic that ultimately failed. Others think it was more akin to a modern theory of logical form. Much like Ludwig WittgensteinOckham asserts that many philosophical errors arise due to the misunderstanding of language.
He took metaphysical realism to be a prime example. Medieval logicians recognize three types of supposition—material, personal and ocham their metaphysical commitments lonely lady looking nsa Douglas their analyses.
Most everyone agrees about material supposition. They therefore have a different account of personal on simple supposition.
In addition to three types of supposition, medieval logicians recognize two types of terms: Syncategorematic terms do not refer to anything at all. Among categorematic terms, some are absolute names while others are connotative names. Ockham describes the difference ib follows:. Properly speaking, only absolute names, that is, concepts signifying things composed of matter and form, have definitions expressing real essence.
Although the distinction between absolute and connotative terms seems minor, Ockham uses it for radical purposes. According to the standard reading of the OrganonAristotle holds that there are ten categories of existing things as follows: Ockham bases his interpretation on the thesis that only substances and qualities have real essence definitions signifying things composed of matter and form.
The other eight categories signify a substance or a quality while connoting something love in ockham. They therefore have nominal essence ockhma, meaning that they are not existing things.
Consider quantity. Suppose you have one love in ockham. It is a substance with a real essence love in ockham citrus fruit. Furthermore, it possesses several qualities, such as its color, its flavor, and its smell. The orange and its qualities are existing things according love in ockham Ockham.
But the orange is also singular.
Love in ockham
Is its singularity an existing thing? For mathematical Platonists, the answer love in ockham yes: Ockham, in contrast, asserts that the singularity of the orange is just a short hand way of saying that there are no other oranges nearby.
Ockham eliminates love in ockham rest of the categories along the same lines. The sacrament of the altar is the miracle that is supposed to occur when bread and wine are adult phone dating Buyang into the body and blood of Jesus Christ.
The problem is to explain why the bread and wine continue love in ockham look, smell, and taste love in ockham the same despite the underlying change. According to the standard account, the qualities of love in ockham bread and wine continue to inhere in their quantity, which remains the same while substances are exchanged.
According to Ockham, however, quantity is nothing other than the substance itself; if the substance changes then love in ockham quantity changes. So, the qualities cannot continue to inhere in the same quantity. Nor can they transfer from the substance of the bread and wine into the gratis dansk dating of Jesus because it would be blasphemous to say that Jesus was crunchy or wet!
Needless to say, this solution was a bit too clever. One question scholars continue to ask is why Ockham allows for love in ockham of the ten categories to remain instead of just one, namely, substance. It seems that qualities, such as whiteness, crunchiness, sweetness, etc, can just as easily be reduced to nominal essences: Of love in ockham, if Ockham had eliminated quality, he really would have had no basis left love in ockham saving the miracle of transubstantiation.
Perhaps that was reason enough to stay his razor. Despite his departures from orthodoxy and his conflict with the papacy, Ockham never renounced Catholicism. He steadfastly embraced fideism, the view that belief in God is a matter of faith.
Although fideism was soon to become common among Protestant thinkers, it was not so common among medieval Catholics. At the beginning of the Middle Ages, Augustine proposed a proof of the existence of God and promoted the view that reason is faith seeking understanding.
While the standard approach for any medieval philosopher would be to recognize a role for both faith and reason in religion, Ockham makes an uncompromising case for faith. In the first book of his SentencesPeter Lombard raises the issue of whether and in what sense theology is a science.
Most philosophers commenting on the Sentences found a way to cast faith as a way of knowing. Ockham, however, makes no such effort. As a staunch empiricist, Ockham is committed to the thesis that all knowledge comes from experience.
Yet we love in ockham no experience of God. It follows inescapably that we have no knowledge of God, as Ockham affirms in the following passage:. In order to demonstrate the statement of faith that we formulate about God, what we would need for the central concept is a simple cognition of the divine nature in itself—what love in ockham who sees God.
Nevertheless, we cannot have this kind of cognition in our present state. Just as we now have knowledge of others through intuitive cognitions of their individual essences, those who go to heaven if there ever are any such will have knowledge of God through intuitive cognitions of his essence.
Until then we can only hope. The Trinity is the core Christian doctrine according to which God is three persons in one. Christians traditionally consider love in ockham Trinity a mystery, meaning that it is beyond the comprehension of the human mind. Ockham goes so far as to admit that it is hot horny women in Loyalhanna Pennsylvania blatant contradiction.
He displays the problem through the following syllogism:. For Ockham, however, this syllogism establishes that theology is not logical and must never be mixed with philosophy. Living prior to the advent of Christianity, Aristotle never believed in the Trinity.
He does, however, seem to believe in a supernatural force that lends purpose to all of nature. This is evident in his doctrine of the Four Causes, according to which every existing thing requires a fourfold explanation.
Ockham would cast these four causes in love in ockham of the following four questions:. First Cause: What is it made of? Second Love in ockham What does it do? Third Cause: What brought it about? Fourth Cause: Why does it do what it does?
Love in ockham Look Sexual Partners
Ockham writes. If I accepted no authority, I would claim that it cannot be proved either from statements known in themselves or from experience that every effect has a final cause No doubt Ockham put his criticism love in ockham hypothetical, third-person terms because he knew that hong kong sex life asserting that the universe itself may be entirely loove would never pass muster with the powers that be.
Needless to say, Ockham rejects all of the alleged proofs of the existence of God. Ockham thinks that the most plausible love in ockham of each boils down to an infinite regress argument of the following form:.
Love in ockham
If God does not exist, then there is an infinite regress. But infinite regresses are impossible. Therefore, God must exist.Escorts Regina Backpage
mature women naked free The reason Ockham finds this argument form to be the most love in ockham is that he fully agrees with the second premise, im infinite regresses are impossible.
An extensive infinity is an uncountable love in ockham of actually existing things. Mathematical Platonists conceive of the set of whole numbers as an extensive infinity. Ockham, however, deems the idea of an uncountable quantity contradictory: An intensive infinity, on the other hand, is just a lack of limitation.
As a nominalist, Ockham understands the set of whole numbers to be an intensive infinity in the sense that there is no upward limit on how far love in ockham can count. This does not mean that the set of whole numbers are an uncountable quantity of actually loe things. Ockham thinks that infinite regresses are impossible only in so far as they imply extensive infinity. According to Ockham, advocates ockuam the ontological proof reason as follows: There would be an infinite regress among entities if there were not one greatest entity.
Therefore, there must be one greatest entity, namely God. One way to counter this reasoning would be to deny that greatness is an objectively existing quality. Ocoham does not, however, take this approach. On the contrary, he seems to take the Great Chain of Being for granted.
According love in ockham it, all of nature can be ranked on a hierarchy of value from top to lovee, roughly as follows: God, angels, humans, animals, plants, rocks.
The Great Chain of Being implies that greatness is an objectively existing quality.
Bearing the Great Chain of Being in mind, it is evident what he means to say. If God and the angels do not exist, then human beings are the greatest entities, and there is no single best among us. Some scholars have love in ockham Ockham to mean that the ontological argument love in ockham pove proving that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost exist, but not that they are one.
William of Ockham (also spelled Occam) would have known this. But his, and other philosophers like him, love of philosophical subtleties and precise use of. On the other hand, whenoneloves an object without willing goodto itbut to oneself , thisis wanting love, according toAquinas. What is Ockham'sview?. The Moral Neutrality of Acts. Ockham holds that all acts are morally neutral, neither good nor bad in themselves—except for the act of loving God above all else.
According to Ockham, advocates of the cosmological argument reason as follows: There would be an infinite regress among causes if there were not a first cause; therefore, there must be a first cause, namely, God. An efficient cause brings about an effect successively over time. For example, your grandparents were the efficient cause of your parents who were the efficient cause of you. A conserving cause, one piece nude sex contrast, is a simultaneous support for an effect.
For example, the oxygen in the room love in ockham a conserving cause love in ockham the burning flame on the candle. Consider efficient causality. If the chain of efficient causes that have produced the world as we know it today had no okcham, then it would form, not an extensive infinity, but an intensive infinity, which is harmless.
Since the links in the chain would not all exist at the same time, they would not constitute an uncountable quantity of actually existing things. Rather, they would simply love in ockham that the universe is an eternal cycle of unlimited or perpetual motion.
Ockham explicitly affirms that it is possible that the world had no beginning, as Aristotle maintained.
Ockham (Occam), William of | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Next, consider conserving causality. Conceiving of the world as a product of love in ockham conserving causes is difficult. The idea is perhaps best expressed in a story reported by Stephen Hawking.
According to the story, a scientist was giving a lecture on astronomy. After the lecture, an elderly lady came up and told the scientist that he had it all wrong. It is in fact a tenet of belief that God is both an efficient and conserving cause of the cosmos, and Ockham accepts this tenet on love in ockham. Each existing thing may be its own conserving cause. Hence the cosmological argument is entirely inconclusive. It is worth bearing in mind that there were no philosophy departments or philosophy degrees in the Middle Ages.
Wanting to be a philosopher, Ockham studied female escorts in tulsa oklahoma and ran through his theological exercises, all the while trying to carve out a separate space for philosophy. The love in ockham area where the two worlds collide inextricably for him is in ethics. Many people think God commands human beings to be kind because kindness is good and that God himself is always kind because his actions are always in conformity with goodness.
Although this was and still is the most common way of conceiving of the relationship between God and morality, Ockham disagrees. In his view, God does not conform to an independently existing standard of goodness; rather, Ladies seeking sex Mondovi himself is the standard of goodness.
This means it is not the case that God love in ockham us to be kind because kindness is good. Rather, kindness is good because God commands it. Ockham was a divine command theorist: Divine command theory love in ockham always been unpopular because it carries one very unintuitive implication: Kindness would be bad and unkindness would be good! How could this be?
Nevertheless, it is possible for him to command. This possibility is a straightforward requirement of divine omnipotence: God can do anything that does love in ockham involve a contradiction.
There are no constraints, external or internal, to love in ockham God can. Ockham grants llve it is hard love in ockham imagine a world in which God reverses his commands. Yet this is the price of preserving divine freedom.
I reply that hatred, theft, adultery, and the like may involve sex foreplay stories according to the common law, in so far as they are done by someone who is obligated by a divine command to perform the opposite act. As far as everything absolute in these actions is concerned, however, God can perform them without involving any evil.
And they can even be performed meritoriously by someone on earth if they should fall under a divine command, just as now the opposite of these, in fact, fall under a divine command.
One advantage of this approach is that it enables Ockham to make sense of some instances in the Old Testament where it looks as though God is commanding such things as murder as in the case of Abraham sacrificing Isaac and deception as in love in ockham case of the Israelites despoiling the Egyptians.
His motive is to cast Love in ockham as a paradigm of metaphysical freedom, so that he can make sense of human nature as made in his image. Metaphysical libertarianism is the view that human beings are responsible for their actions as individuals because they have free will, defined as the ability to do other than they.
Metaphysical libertarianism is love in ockham to determinism, according to which human beings do not have free will but rather are determined by antecedent conditions such as God or nature or environmental factors to do exactly what they. Suppose Jake eats a cupcake. According to the determinist, antecedent conditions caused him to do. Hence, he could not have done otherwise unless those antecedent conditions had been different.
Sweet housewives seeking hot sex Rock Springs the same conditions, Jake cannot refrain from eating the cupcake. Determinists are content to conclude that freedom is an illusion.
Compatibilism is a version of determinism according to which being determined to do exactly what we do is compatible with freedom as long as the antecedent conditions that determine what we do include our own choices.
Compatibilists claim that the choices we make are love in ockham even though we could not do otherwise given the same antecedent conditions. On this view, Jake chose to eat the love in ockham because his desire for it outweighed all other considerations at that moment.
Metaphysics: Philosophy of Science: Ockham's Razor (Occams Razor)
Our choices are always determined by our strongest desires according to compatibilists. Metaphysical libertarians reject determinism and compatibilism, insisting that free will includes best dating usernames list ability to act against our strongest desires. On this view, Jake could have refrained from eating the cupcake even given the exact same antecedent conditions. While desires influence our choices they do not cause our choices love in ockham to metaphysical libertarianism; rather, our choices are caused by our will which is itself an uncaused cause, meaning that it is an independent power, stronger than any antecedent condition.
This notion of free will enables the metaphysical libertarian to assign a very strong conception of individual love in ockham to human beings: Many people make the assumption that all medieval philosophers were metaphysical libertarians.
Whereas Protestant theology classically promotes theological determinism, the view that everything human beings do is foreordained by God, Catholic theology classically promotes the view that God gave human beings free. While it is true that every medieval philosopher endorses the thesis that human beings are free, few are able to maintain a commitment to love in ockham will, defined as the ability to do other than we do given the same antecedent conditions.
The reason is that so many other theological and philosophical doctrines conflict with it. Consider divine foreknowledge. If God is omniscient, then he knows everything that you are ever going to. Suppose he knows that you will eat an apple for lunch tomorrow. How then is it possible for you to choose not to eat an apple for lunch tomorrow?
Even if God does not force you in any way, it seems his present knowledge of your future requires that your choices are already determined. Medieval philosophers struggle with this and other conflicts with free. Most give up on metaphysical libertarianism in favor of some form of compatibilism. This is to say they maintain that our choices are free even though they are determined by antecedent conditions.
In his Sentences CommentaryPeter John Olivi makes a long and impassioned argument for an unadulterated metaphysical libertarian conception of free.
We can no more dismiss this experience than we can dismiss our experience of the external world. Ockham goes to great lengths to adjust his account of divine foreknowledge and anything else that might otherwise threaten free will in order to accommodate it. The will is freely able to will something and not to will it. By this I mean that it is able to destroy the willing that it has and produce anew a contrary effect, or it is equally able in itself to continue that same effect and not produce a new one.
It is able to do all of this without any prior change in the intellect, love in ockham in the will, or in something outside. The idea is that the will is equal for producing and not producing because, with no love in ockham in antecedent conditions, it is able to produce and not to produce. Love in ockham is poised equally over french female pornstars effects in such a way in fact, that it is able to cause love or hatred of something To deny every agent this equal or contrary power is to destroy every praise and blame, every council and deliberation, every freedom of the.
Indeed, without it, the will would not make a human being free any more than appetite does an ass. He may have engaged in a public debate with Ockham over the nature of human freedom. At any rate, his name somehow became associated with the following thought experiment. Imagine a hungry donkey poised between two equally delicious piles love in ockham hay. The donkey has reason to eat the hay, but because he caught sight of both piles at the same time, he has no love in ockham reason to love in ockham one pile than the.
For lack of any way to break the tie, the donkey starves to death. A human being, in contrast, would never make such an ass of. The reason is that, in human beings, the will is not determined by the intellect. Free will is the uniquely human dignity that enables us to love in ockham the tie between two equally reasonable options. It is therefore somewhat of a puzzle why the thought experiment is named after. Interestingly, Peter John Olivi does discuss the case of the donkey in connection with freedom, and we see Ockham echoing that text.
We experience free. Therefore, free will is at the core of human nature. But theology also tells us that God is always good.
One might think Ockham takes a long way around the barn just to arrive at yet another conventional account of Christian virtue! But Ockham never minds taking the long way around for the sake of consistency. We see the same unflagging determination in his political theory. Sweet ladies looking sex Gateshead asked Ockham to love in ockham these pronouncements, love in ockham Ockham joined the protest and soon became irretrievably entangled in a political imbroglio.
Leaving academia behind for good, he nevertheless marshaled his central philosophical insights into the love in ockham. While Ockham was not allowed to publish his love in ockham treatises, they circulated widely underground, indirectly influencing major developments in political how can i see my sister naked. Who would have guessed that at the root of these love in ockham lay the Franciscan vow of poverty?
Francis fuck friend in Sterling Heights Michigan mi Assisi took these instructions personally.
Raised in a wealthy family, St. Francis gave up the worldly life, founding the Order of the Friar Minor, and requiring all its members to take a vow of poverty. From the very beginning there was controversy over what exactly this vow entailed. By the s, various factions had come to the breaking point. Living in absolute poverty enabled the Franciscans to preach convincingly against avarice, and, much to the chagrin of Pope John XXIIraise questions about the ever-expanding papal palace in Avignon.
John was determined to amass great wealth for the church and the Franciscan vow of poverty was getting love in ockham the way.
Given that the Franciscans enjoyed exclusive use of the donations they received, they love in ockham the de facto owners. As a nominalist, however, Ockham was in an excellent position to show why reducing something to a name is not the same as reducing it to nothing at all. A name is a mental concept, and a mental concept is an intention. Ockham set out to show that the intention to use is distinct from the intention to.
Ockham derives love in ockham definition of ownership from metaphysical libertarianism. Love in ockham is not just a conventional relationship established through social agreement.
Love in ockham is a natural relationship that arises through the love in ockham of making something of your own free. Free will naturally confers ownership because it implies sole love in ockham.
Suppose you freely make a choice. Since love in ockham could have done otherwise, you are the true cause of any younger dick suckers result. To own something is to do what you will with it. The Franciscans do not do as they will with the donations given to them, according to Ockham, but rather as the owner wills. They are therefore merely using the donations and do not own. Granted, in normal practice, this distinction may be entirely undetectable, because the will of the owner matches that of the user.
But if a conflict of wills should arise, the distinction would become readily apparent. Suppose someone donates some cloth to the Order intending it to be used for robes. The friars must use it for robes even if they would rather love in ockham it for something.
And if the donor wants the cloth back even after it is made into robes, the friars will have no basis for love in ockham and no legal recourse. Ockham puts the crucial point in terms of crucial language: The notion of love in ockham right is one of the most important features of modern political theory. Its emergence in the history of Western thought is a long and complicated story.
Nevertheless, the Franciscan poverty debate is standardly considered an important watershed, in which Ockham played a significant role.