If you postulate one idea (form) to account for the fact that all big things are big, you are still left with two classes of big things -- the idea and the particulars --- and you still have to explain why both those classes of big things are big. You will then have to have a further idea for both classes to participate then, and then in the same way a third idea to account for the fact that the first and the second idea have a common predicate, big, and so on ad infinitum.

Which statement in the passage best reflects sumer's opinion of the dred scott decision? a."i speak what cannot be denied." b."[the] judgment was sustained by a falsification of history." b."the opinion was more thoroughly abominable than anything history." i speak what cannot be denied when i declare that the opinion of the chief justice in the case of dred scott was more thoroughly abominable than anything of the kind in the history of courts. judicial baseness reached its lowest point on that occasion. you have not forgotten that terrible decision where a most unrighteous judgment was sustained by a falsification of history. -charles sumner, 1865