Albertus Magnus: Different Traditions of Thought and the Transcendentals

Home , Albertus Magnus, Alexander of Hales, Bonaventure, Summa

CHAPTER FIVE

ALBERTUS MAGNUS: DIFFERENT TRADITIONS OF THOUGHT AND THE TRANSCENDENTALS

The doctrine of the transcendentals was not only elaborated in the Fran- ciscan school, but also by the Dominican Albert “the German” (Teu- tonicus) (ca. 1200–1280), known as Albertus Magnus since the middle of the fourteenth century. Like Alexander of Hales and Bonaventure, he was active at the University of Paris, where he occupied one of the two Dominican chairs in the Theological Faculty from 1242 to 1248. Albert was the main figure in the process of assimilating philosophy into the Latin world.1 During his long career the Doctor universalis realized five large projects—(in chronological order) the ParisianSumma , the commentary on the Sentences, the commenting on the complete corpus dionysiacum, the commenting on the entire Aristotelian corpus, and the Summa theologiae. From these projects one can gather Albert’s importance for the development of the theory of the transcendentals;2 he connected the doctrine with both the Platonic-Dionysian and the

1 For Albert’s philosophical importance, cf. A. de Libera, Albert le Grand et la philosophie, Paris 1990; revised version: Métaphysique et noétique: Albert le Grand, Paris 2005. J. A. Aertsen, “Albertus Magnus und die mittelalterliche Philosophie”, in: Allge- meine Zeitschrift für Philosophie 21 (1996), pp. 111–128. L. Honnefelder, “Die phi- losophiegeschichtliche Bedeutung Alberts des Großen”, in: L. Honnefelder, R. Wood / M. Dreyer / M-A. Aris (eds.), Albertus Magnus and the Beginnings of the Medieval Reception of Aristotle in the Latin West. From Richardus Rufus to Franciscus de Mayro- nis, Münster 2005 (Subsidia Albertina, 1), pp. 249–280. For the chronology of Albert’s works, H. Anzulewicz, De forma resultante in speculo. Die theologische Relevanz des Bildbegriffs und des Spiegelmodells in den Frühwerken des Albertus Magnus, Vol. I, Münster 1999 (Beiträge zur Geschichte des Philosophie und Theologie des Mittel- alters. Neue Folge, 53/1), pp. 12–17. 2 On Albert’s doctrine of the transcendentals, cf. H. Kühle, “Die Lehre Alberts des Grossen von den Transzendentalien”, in: F.-J. von Rintelen (ed.), Philosophia Peren- nis. Abhandlungen zu ihrer Vergangenheit und Gegenwart (Festgabe Josef Geyser zum 60. Geburtstag), Vol. I, Regensburg 1930, pp. 131–147. J. A. Aertsen, “Die Frage nach dem Ersten und Grundlegenden. Albert der Große und die Lehre von den Transzen- dentalien”, in: W. Senner (ed.), Albertus Magnus. Zum Gedenken nach 800 Jahren: Neue Zugänge, Aspekte und Perspektiven, Berlin 2001 (Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte des Dominikanerordens, 10), pp. 91–112. 178 chapter five

Aristotelian-Avicennian tradition of thought, defined his position in relation to Philip the Chancellor’s first account, and adopted the theological function of the first concepts from theSumma Halensis.

5.1 The treatise De bono: Albert and Philip the Chancellor

1. Two early writings of Albert deal with the good, a constantly recur- ring topic in his works.3 His first treatise known to us, which goes back to his activity as a teacher in Dominican study houses in Germany, is titled De natura boni (ca. 1236–1237). During his stay at the University of Paris in the 1240’s he composed another treatise on the good: De bono. This work was part of Albert’s first large project; it was the last in a series of six works that put together made up what has been called the Parisian Summa de creaturis. Thematically the two early writings agree in their focus on the doctrine of the virtues, but they approach this issue in different manners.4 The uncompleted workDe natura boni starts with a quotation from Scripture (Luke 18,19): “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone”. From this reply Albert derives that the good is twofold: what is good through itself and essentially good, which is God alone, and the created good. In the brief prologue, he indicates that this treatise will discuss the nature of the created good from an ethical perspective (moraliter).5 The workDe bono, on the other hand, begins with an extensive account of the good “according to the common concept of ‘good’” (secundum communem intentionem boni). This treatise is founded on a metaphysics of the good, as it appears from the contents of the first question, which is divided into four sections:

3 Cf. H. Anzulewicz, “Bonum als Sclüsselbegriff bei Albertus Magnus”, in: W. Senner (ed.), Albertus Magnus. Zum Gedenken nach 800 Jahren, pp. 113–140. 4 Contra: A. Tarabochia Canavero, Alberto Magno, Il bene. Trattato sulla natura del bene. La fortezza, La prudenza, La giustizia (intr., transl. and notes), Milano 1987, p. 11. 5 Albert the Great, De natura boni, prol. (ed. E. Filthaut, in: Opera omnia, Vol. XXV/1, Münster 1974, p. 1): “Huius igitur boni creati naturam in hoc tractatu cupi- mus magis moraliter quam substantialiter exsequi”.