Nominalism was a school of thought 
that came to receive widespread acceptance in Europe on the eve of the 
Protestant reformation. In opposition to the Aristotelian/Thomistic 
synthesis, which asserted that God’s will for the world corresponds to 
the nature of how reality actually is, William of Ockham and other 
medieval nominalists asserted that there is no independent rational 
order guiding God’s decisions.
Ockham was not even comfortable acknowledging that God’s own 
character formed the basis of His will-acts. Indeed, for God to be 
totally ultimate, Ockham taught, His decisions must be unconstrained by 
any criteria whatsoever. Ockham’s God was thus capricious, arbitrary and
 unpredictable.
This nominalist revolution had a profound effect on how late-medieval
 Europeans perceived the world. The universe ceased to be conceived in 
the way we find in Dante—a harmony of patterns, fitting together in a 
glorious dance-like ecosystem—since nominalism implied that there are no
 inherent patterns to the world apart from those which emerge 
accidentally through the aggregate of God’s pedestrian will-acts. God’s 
commands are not based on what is best for a thing according to its 
nature, because things no longer possessed natures after “Ockham’s 
razor” shaved off universals. Nominalists thus evacuated all teleology 
from the universe, leaving only the names and concepts imposed on it 
from outside. (Teleology refers to an account of reality in which final 
causes exist in nature, so that just as human actions are performed with
 a purpose or final end in view, so things within nature have a final 
cause which defines the good of each particular thing.)
There is a sense in which the influence of nominalism in contemporary
 culture is ubiquitous, since the nominalist revolution greatly 
contributed to the advent of secular modernity. At least that is what 
many scholars, including those associated with the “radical orthodoxy” 
movement, have convincingly argued. But my purpose in this series of 
articles is less ambitious than trying to offer an account of the 
origins of modern secularism. I simply wish to zero-in on a few 
practical areas where the thinking of contemporary Christians has been 
tinctured by the poison of nominalism.
Now what, you may be wondering, does any of this have to do with sex? To find out, click on the following link to read my Colson Center article on the subject: