Copilot
好的。我将结合唯名论（Nominalism，起源于中世纪，经由奥卡姆等思想家发展）的核心思想来评析陈京元案。唯名论的哲学核心包括：普遍概念并无独立实在性，只是名称（names）、个别事物才是真实存在的、警惕抽象概念被权力滥用。以下为中英文对照分析：
⚖️ 唯名论哲学视角下的陈京元案
The Case of Chen Jingyuan through the Philosophy of Nominalism
一、普遍概念的虚构性（The Fiction of Universals）
中文：唯名论认为，“普遍概念”只是语言的名称，而非真实存在。
法院将陈京元的行为归类为“扰乱社会秩序”，这是一个抽象的普遍概念。
从唯名论角度看，这种概念并没有独立实在性，它只是一个名称，被权力用来压制个别的真实行动。
English: Nominalism holds that “universals” are mere names, not real entities.
The court labeled Chen’s actions as “disturbing social order,” an abstract universal.
From a nominalist view, such a concept has no independent reality; it is a name deployed by power to suppress concrete individual acts.
二、个别事物的真实（Reality of Particulars）
中文：唯名论强调，只有个别事物才是真实存在的。
陈京元的具体行为是：写作、转发、表达批评。
这些个别行为本身并不等于“扰乱秩序”，它们是具体的思想与表达。
法院却将个别行为抽象化，归入一个虚构的普遍范畴，从而抹去了个别的真实。
English: Nominalism emphasizes that only particulars are real.
Chen’s concrete acts were writing, reposting, and expressing critique.
These particular acts are not identical with “disturbance of order”; they are specific expressions of thought.
The court abstracted these particulars into a fictive universal, erasing their reality.
三、名称与权力（Names and Power）
中文：唯名论提醒我们，名称并非中立，而是可能被权力操控。
“扰乱秩序”作为名称，被赋予了压制性的力量。
它不再是描述，而是成为惩罚的工具。
English: Nominalism reminds us that names are not neutral but can be manipulated by power.
The name “disturbance of order” was endowed with repressive force.
It ceased to be descriptive and became an instrument of punishment.
四、语言与正义（Language and Justice）
中文：唯名论的洞见在于：正义不能依赖抽象的名称，而应回到个别事实。
陈京元的个别行为应当在具体语境中被理解，而不是被抽象化为普遍罪名。
真正的正义应当承认个别的复杂性，而不是用虚构的普遍概念来消解。
English: The nominalist insight is that justice cannot rely on abstract names but must return to particulars.
Chen’s particular acts should be understood in their concrete context, not abstracted into a universal crime.
True justice acknowledges the complexity of particulars rather than dissolving them into fictive universals.
五、总结（Conclusion）
中文：从唯名论的哲学视角看，本案的问题在于：
用抽象的普遍概念取代了个别事实；
将“名称”当作实在，从而赋予其惩罚性力量；
抹去了个别行为的真实与复杂性。
然而，被告在狱中坚持写作与自辩，正体现了唯名论式的抗争：拒绝被抽象化为“扰乱者”，坚持作为具体的、真实的个体存在。
English: From a nominalist perspective, the flaws of this case are:
Replacing particular facts with abstract universals;
Treating “names” as realities, thereby granting them punitive force;
Erasing the reality and complexity of particular acts.
Yet the defendant’s persistence in writing and self-defense embodies a nominalist resistance: refusing to be abstracted into a “disturber,” insisting on existing as a concrete, real individual.
要不要我把这份唯名论的分析，与实在论（Realism）的对照并置，写成一篇 “名称与实在的合唱：中世纪哲学对当代司法的反思” 的中英文论文草稿？