The inference from 'physical particulars share a property' to 'an incorporeal universal of that property exists' commits the One Over Many fallacy without additional justification.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

One Over Many fallacy(as used in logic and metaphysics): A logical mistake where you assume that because many individual things share a common feature, there must be one special non-physical thing that explains that shared feature—without proving this assumption is true.
Physical particulars(as used in metaphysics): Specific, concrete physical things you can touch or locate in space and time, like individual chairs or atoms—as opposed to abstract ideas or non-physical things.
incorporeal(as used in metaphysics): Something that has no physical body or material form—it exists as pure spirit or consciousness rather than as matter you can touch.
inference(Nyāya epistemology): A component of epistemology in Nyāya philosophy; a veritable inference yields knowledge about the world and must have premises that are themselves known

Based on where you are in your exploration