 According to some philosophers, universals and tropes may coexist in one ontological framework (see, e.g., Lowe 2006 for a well-known general system of this kind, and Orilia 2006a, for a proposal based on empirical data from quantum mechanics). However, nowadays they are typically seen as alternatives, with the typical supporter of universals (“universalist”) trying to do without tropes (e.g., Armstrong 1997) and the typical supporter of tropes (“tropist”) trying to dispense with universals (e.g., Maurin  2002).[5]  In order to clarify how differently they see matters, we may take advantage of states of affairs. Both parties may agree, say, that there are two red apples, \(a\) and \(b\). They will immediately disagree, however, for the universalist will add that