DOCSLIB.ORG

A Contextual Examination of St. Anselm's Ontological

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Contextual Examination of St. Anselm's Ontological A CONTEXTUAL EXAMINATION OF ST. ANSELM'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT MARTA E. LAYTON Bachelor of Science in Mathematical Sciences The University of North Carolina at Greensboro May, 2005 submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN PHILOSOPHY at the CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY August, 2008 This thesis has been approved for the Department of PHILOSOPHY and the College of Graduate Studies by ________________________________________ Thesis Chairperson, Dr. Nicholas Moutafakis ________________________________________ Department & Date ________________________________________ Dr. Martin Harvey ________________________________________ Department & Date ________________________________________ Dr. Diane Steinberg ________________________________________ Department & Date ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In many regards a masters thesis is a solitary endeavor. However, this project would not have been possible without the assistance of many people. I am particularly thankful to my thesis advisor and committee chairperson, Dr. Nicholas Moutafakis, for the guidance and critique that helped me refine the ideas presented here. I also thank the members of my thesis committee, Dr. Diane Steinberg and Dr. Martin Harvey, and many other faculty and students of the Cleveland State University Department of Philosophy, whose willingness to discuss my ideas has been invaluable. iii A CONTEXTUAL EXANIMATION OF ST. ANSELM'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT MARTA LAYTON ABSTRACT Many scholars, both in the history of philosophy and in contemporary times, have criticized and defended St. Anselm's ontological argument. Much of the work on the subject has evaluated the argument of Proslogion II1 and III using symbolic logic, and has either focused on presenting what the author thinks St. Anselm was saying in those chapters, or has critiqued the logic of the ontological argument's structure or of the plausibility of its premises. Few authors have looked at how St. Anselm's conception of God in the later chapters of the Proslogion and in the Monologion affect the ontological argument. Fewer still have inspected the way St. Anselm would have been affected by historical events and by the work of earlier philosophers. This thesis aims to examine the ontological argument of St. Anselm, both in terms of why St. Anselm chose to develop it as he did and whether it is logically valid and sound. I will begin by exploring the historical events that would have influenced St. Anselm's thought, such as the hierarchical nature of Benedictine monasticism and the power struggles between the Visigoths and Franks in medieval France. I will then turn to St. Anselm's writings, looking at the theistic proofs he gives in both the Monologion and 1 Throughout this thesis I will use this notation to refer to the chapter number of the book being discussed. It allows me to avoid less direct phrasing, such as "the second chapter of the Proslogion." iv the Proslogion. In this way I will be able to identify the ontological argument that was advanced by St. Anselm. Having identified the Anselmian ontological argument, I will then evaluate this argument's logical validity and soundness. I will first consider what logical sources from antiquity St. Anselm would likely have had access to. This will allow me to establish the system of logic St. Anselm would have used in evaluating his argument. I will conclude this thesis by critiquing the challenges raised by Gaunilo, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Immanuel Kant to Anselm's argument. This approach makes it possible to evaluate St. Anselm according to the logic he would have known when constructing his argument, and thereby to avoid anachronistic criticisms. v TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... iv CHAPTER I. Introduction .................................................................................... 1 II. HISTORICAL INFLUENCES ON ST. ANSELM'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT ………………………………… 4 Introduction ………………………………………………. 4 The Development of Christian Monasticism …………….. 6 Ecumenicism and the Ontological Argument ……………. 11 Toward a Definition of Power …………………………… 16 Conclusion ……………………………………………….. 23 III. ST. ANSELM'S PROOFS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD IN THE MONOLOGION ……………………………………………. 25 Introduction ………………………………………………. 25 Goodness and Greatness in the Monologion …………….. 26 Existence in the Monologion …………………………….. 29 Conclusion ……………………………………………….. 35 vi IV. ST. ANSELM'S PROOFS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD IN THE PROSLOGION ……………………………………………… 36 Introduction ………………………………………………. 36 The Argument in Proslogion II …………………………... 37 One Argument or Two? …………………………………... 43 The Argument in Proslogion III ………………………….. 46 Conclusion ………………………………………………... 49 V. THE INFLUENCE OF CLASSICAL LOGIC ON THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT …………………………………. 50 Introduction ……………………………………………….. 50 Logic Before Aristotle …………………………………….. 51 Aristotelian Logic …………………………………………. 55 Definitions and First Principles …………………………… 59 Stoic and Megarian Logic ………………………………… 63 Textual Transmission and Medieval Logic ………………. 66 Conclusion ………………………………………………. 69 VI. DEFENDING THE FOOL: CRITICISMS OF ST. ANSELM'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT ………………………………… 72 Introduction ……………………………………………… 72 Historical Criticisms …………………………………….. 73 Gaunilo ………………………………………….. 73 St. Thomas Aquinas …………………………….. 78 Immanuel Kant …………………………………. 80 vii The Validity of Proslogion II's Argument ……………….. 84 The Validity of Proslogion III's Argument ………………. 87 Conclusion ……………………………………………….. 93 VII. Conclusion ……………………………………………………….. 94 BIBLIOGRAPHY ……………………………………………………………….. 97 viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Of the various arguments for the existence of God, the ontological argument is one of the most influential to the history of later thought. Many of the medieval arguments for God's existence are not seriously considered viable by contemporary scholars, but the ontological argument is still heavily debated. At first glance, the argument seems too simple to survive scrutiny, and it appears that it merely asserts God's existence rather than proving it. However, when the ontological argument is examined more closely, we discover that it is fiendishly difficult to disprove. St. Anselm presented the ontological argument in Proslogion II and III. He begins by defining God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" and observes that, for the fool to deny God's existence and to understand what he is saying, he must grant God existence in the understanding. St. Anselm argues that God cannot exist only within the fool's understanding because it would be greater for God to exist beyond the 1 understanding than to be limited to the fool's understanding. This proof draws on a metaphysical assertion that existence not limited to the understanding is greater than existence limited to the understanding – what a contemporary philosopher might describe as the belief that existence (as more than just a concept) is a greatness-enhancing quality. The claim that existence is a predicate of any sort is very controversial in post-Kantian philosophy, but this problem does not seem to have troubled St. Anselm; neither St. Anselm nor his contemporaries questioned this aspect of the ontological argument. This thesis will therefore focus on other challenges to the ontological argument that were more debated by philosophers in St. Anselm's own day, such as whether a being "than which nothing greater can be conceived" is itself conceivable, and whether the fool understands God in the way the ontological argument requires. The ontological argument was not St. Anselm's first attempt to prove God's existence. In his earlier work, The Monologion, St. Anselm offered a proof built on observations about the way different beings inherit their characteristics. If a being existed, St. Anselm argued, it either received its existence through another being or through itself. If its existence was inherited, then the being had existence of a lower sort than the being from which it inherited its existence. Moreover, there could be only one being through which all beings received their existence, and this being had existence of a higher type than any other being. St. Anselm also developed similar arguments for greatness and goodness, and observed that the being through which all other beings inherit these characteristics was the same being, which St. Anselm named God. Since all other beings receive their existence through God, and since a being could not pass on a characteristic that it did not itself possess, St. Anselm concluded that God must exist. 2 Since St. Anselm considered this proof successful, it seems odd that he would publish a second proof for God's existence. St. Anselm explains his reasons for offering this additional proof in the prologue of the Proslogion. He writes, After I had published, at the solicitous entreaties of a certain brethren, a brief work [the Monologion] as an example of meditation on the grounds of faith, in the person of one who investigates, in a course of silent reasoning with himself, matters of which he is ignorant; considering that this book was knit together by the linking of many arguments, I began to ask myself whether there might be found a single argument which would require no other for its proof than itself alone.2 In the Monologion St. Anselm is writing in the person of someone investigating questions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RELG 399 Fall2019
    McGill University School of Religious Studies RELG 399 TEXTS OF CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY (Late Antiquity) In the Fall Term of 2019 this seminar course will focus on Christian spirituality in Late Antiquity with close study and interpretation of Aurelius Augustine’s spiritual odyssey the Confessiones, his account of creation in De genesi ad litteram, and his handbook of hermeneutics De doctrina Christiana. We will also read Ancius Manlius Severinus Boethius’s treatment of theodicy in De consolatione philosophiae, his De Trinitate, and selections from De Musica. Professor: Torrance Kirby Office Hours: Birks 206, Tuesdays/Thursdays, 10:00–11:00 am Email: [email protected] Birks Building, Room 004A Tuesdays/Thursdays 4:05–5:25 pm COURSE SYLLABUS—FALL TERM 2019 Date Reading 3 September INTRODUCTION 5 September Aurelius Augustine, Confessiones Book I, Early Years 10 September Book II, Theft of Pears 12 September Book III, Adolescence and Student Life 17 September Book IV, Manichee and Astrologer 19 September Book V, Carthage, Rome, and Milan *Confirm Mid-Term Essay Topics (1500-2000 words) (NB Consult the Style Sheet, essay-writing guidelines and evaluation rubric in the appendix to the syllabus.) 24 September Book VI, Secular Ambitions and Conflicts 26 September Book VII, Neoplatonic Quest for the Good 1 October Book VIII, Tolle, lege; tolle, lege 3 October Book IX, Vision at Ostia 8 October Book X, 1-26 Memory *Mid-term Essays due at beginning of class. Essay Conferences to be scheduled for week of 21 October 10 October Book X, 27-43 “Late have I loved you” 15 October Book XI, Time and Eternity 17 October Book XII, Creation Essay Conferences begin this week, Birks 206.
    [Show full text]
  • Can We Prove God's Existence?
    This transcript accompanies the Cambridge in your Classroom video on ‘Can we prove God’s existence?’. For more information about this video, or the series, visit https://www.divinity.cam.ac.uk/study-here/open-days/cambridge-your-classroom Can we prove God’s existence? Professor Catherine Pickstock Faculty of Divinity One argument to prove God’s existence In front of me is an amazing manuscript, is known as the ‘ontological argument’ — called the Proslogion, written nearly 1,000 an argument which, by reason alone – years ago by an Italian Benedictine monk proves that, the very idea of God as a called Anselm. perfect being means that God must exist, that his non-existence would be Anselm went on to become Archbishop of contradictory. Canterbury in 1093, and this manuscript is now kept in the University Library in These kinds of a priori arguments rely on Cambridge. logical deduction, rather than something one has observed or experienced: you It is an exploration of how we can know might be familiar with Kant’s examples: God, written in the form of a prayer, in Latin. Even in translation, it can sound “All bachelors are unmarried men. quite complicated to our modern ears, but Squares have four equal sides. All listen carefully to some of his words here objects occupy space.” translated from Chapters 2 and 3. I am Catherine Pickstock and I teach “If that, than which nothing greater can be Philosophy of Religion at the University of conceived, exists in the understanding Cambridge. And I am interested in how alone, the very being, than which nothing we can know the unknowable, and often greater can be conceived, is one, than look to earlier ways in which thinkers which a greater cannot be conceived.
    [Show full text]
  • St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Williams Honors College, Honors Research The Dr. Gary B. and Pamela S. Williams Honors Projects College Spring 2020 St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death Christopher Choma [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/honors_research_projects Part of the Christianity Commons, Epistemology Commons, European History Commons, History of Philosophy Commons, History of Religion Commons, Metaphysics Commons, Philosophy of Mind Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Recommended Citation Choma, Christopher, "St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death" (2020). Williams Honors College, Honors Research Projects. 1048. https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/honors_research_projects/1048 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by The Dr. Gary B. and Pamela S. Williams Honors College at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The University of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Williams Honors College, Honors Research Projects by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. 1 St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death By: Christopher Choma Sponsored by: Dr. Joseph Li Vecchi Readers: Dr. Howard Ducharme Dr. Nathan Blackerby 2 Table of Contents Introduction p. 4 Section One: Three General Views of Human Nature p.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Logic of the Ontological Argument∗ X
    Paul E. Oppenheimer and Edward N. Zalta 2 by `9y(y =x)' and the claim that x has the property of existence by `E!x'. That is, we represent the difference between the two claims by exploiting the distinction between quantifying over x and predicating existence of On the Logic of the Ontological Argument∗ x. We shall sometimes refer to this as the distinction between the being of x and the existence of x. Thus, instead of reading Anselm as having discovered a way of inferring God's actuality from His mere possibility, Paul E. Oppenheimer we read him as having discovered a way of inferring God's existence from Thinking Machines Corporation His mere being. Another important feature of our reading concerns the fact that we and take the phrase \that than which none greater can be conceived" seriously. Certain inferences in the ontological argument are intimately linked to the logical behavior of this phrase, which is best represented as a definite Edward N. Zalta description.3 If we are to do justice to Anselm's argument, we must not Philosophy Department syntactically eliminate descriptions the way Russell does. One of the Stanford University highlights of our interpretation is that a very simple inference involving descriptions stands at the heart of the argument.4 Saint Anselm of Canterbury offered several arguments for the existence The Language and Logic Required for the Argument of God. We examine the famous ontological argument in Proslogium ii. Many recent authors have interpreted this argument as a modal one.1 But We shall cast our new reading in a standard first-order language.
    [Show full text]
  • AUGUSTINE, Sermones Ad Fratres in Eremo
    PS.-AUGUSTINE, Sermones ad fratres in eremo (Sermons to the Brothers in the Desert); BONAVENTURE, Soliloquium de quatuor mentalibus exercitiis (Soliloquium on the Four Spiritual Exercises); [ANONYMOUS], Pianti e le lamentatione della nostra dona (The Tears and Lamentations of Our Lady), in Italian; PS.-BERNARD of CLAIRVAUX, De contemplatione (On Contemplation); [ANONYMOUS], De religio (On Religion) In Latin and Italian, decorated manuscript on parchment Italy (Northern?), c. 1400-1430 i (paper) + 163+ i (paper) folios on parchment (very fine), lacking leaves at the end (collation i-xiii10 xiv10 [-10, probably cancelled blank] xv-xvi10 xvii4 [original structure uncertain, but lacking leaves at the end]), some leaf and quire signatures remain very bottom outer corner with a letter designating the quire and an Arabic numeral the leaf, horizontal catchwords center lower margin, usually flourished, ruled lightly in ink with single full-length vertical bounding lines (written space 90 x 72-71 mm.), copied in twenty-seven long lines in a very regular southern Gothic bookhand by several scribes, majuscules within the text touched with pale yellow, red rubrics, two- to four-line alternately red and blue initials with pen flourishes in the opposite color, in excellent condition apart from a few folios with very slight powdering of the ink. Bound in eighteenth-century parchment over pasteboard, smooth spine lettered in ink “Sermones/ S. Augustini/ Episc. delin/gua dolosa,” with “C” (a shelfmark), below, in excellent condition. Dimensions 144 x 106 mm. This small-format miscellany contains texts to nourish the religious life, both practically and spiritually. The Sermons to the Brothers in the Desert (attributed to Augustine, but composed many centuries after his death), and the Soliloquy by St.
    [Show full text]
  • Plotinus and Augustine
    The Influence of Plotinus on the Writings of St. Augustine Josiah Meyer History of Ancient & Medieval Philosophy, PH 502 March 8, 2017 1 Introduction If Plato and Aristotle are the most important thinkers of the ancient world, St. Augustine could be a close runner up in brilliance and importance. Far less known, however, is the vital role of Plotinus. Serving as a link between Augustine and Plato, Plotinus was to have a lasting influence on Augustine, and through him on the Christian Church, especially in the West. This paper will bring illumination to the often overlooked intellectual contribution of Plotinus to the thoughts of Augustine. To that end, it will provide an overview of Plotinus’ thought, paying special attention to his use and modification of Plato and Aristotle. It will then turn its attention to Augustine’s appropriation of Plotinus, and the lasting mark he made on the shape of Augustinian theology. Section One: Plotinus Bibliography Plotinus was a native of Lycopolis (or Lycon) in Egypt.1 At the age of 28 he became interested in philosophy and moved to Alexandria to study. After expressing dissatisfaction in several teachers, he finally found Ammonius Saccas (175 AD - 240 AD), declaring, τοῦτον ἐζήτουν, “This is the man I was looking for!” and became his pupil for eleven years.2 This Ammonius Saccas is identified (probably wrongly) by Eusebius as a lapsed Christian. Eusebius 1 Frederick Copleston notes that Eunapis identifies his birthplace as Lycon, while Suidas identifies it as Lycopolis, leaving the exact location a mystery. Frederick Copleston, S.J., A History of Philosophy, vol.
    [Show full text]
  • 15 Famous Greek Mathematicians and Their Contributions 1. Euclid
    15 Famous Greek Mathematicians and Their Contributions 1. Euclid He was also known as Euclid of Alexandria and referred as the father of geometry deduced the Euclidean geometry. The name has it all, which in Greek means “renowned, glorious”. He worked his entire life in the field of mathematics and made revolutionary contributions to geometry. 2. Pythagoras The famous ‘Pythagoras theorem’, yes the same one we have struggled through in our childhood during our challenging math classes. This genius achieved in his contributions in mathematics and become the father of the theorem of Pythagoras. Born is Samos, Greece and fled off to Egypt and maybe India. This great mathematician is most prominently known for, what else but, for his Pythagoras theorem. 3. Archimedes Archimedes is yet another great talent from the land of the Greek. He thrived for gaining knowledge in mathematical education and made various contributions. He is best known for antiquity and the invention of compound pulleys and screw pump. 4. Thales of Miletus He was the first individual to whom a mathematical discovery was attributed. He’s best known for his work in calculating the heights of pyramids and the distance of the ships from the shore using geometry. 5. Aristotle Aristotle had a diverse knowledge over various areas including mathematics, geology, physics, metaphysics, biology, medicine and psychology. He was a pupil of Plato therefore it’s not a surprise that he had a vast knowledge and made contributions towards Platonism. Tutored Alexander the Great and established a library which aided in the production of hundreds of books.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Aquinas and Irenaeus on the Divine and Natural Law
    Randall B. Smith University of St. Thomas, Houston, Texas [email protected] 13 (2020) 2: 175–187 ORCID: 0000-0003-4262-4279 ISSN (print) 1689-5150 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/BPTh.2020.007 ISSN (online) 2450-7059 Thomas Aquinas and Irenaeus on the Divine and Natural Law Abstract. Thomas’s account of the natural law owes a large debt to Aristotle and other early Greek philosophers back to Heraclitus. This debt has long been known and dis- cussed. Largely unrecognized, however, are the crucial influences of the early Greek Fathers of the Church who mediated this classical philosophical heritage to the Chris- tian world. They were the first to set out the relationship between the natural law, the Old Law, and grace which would have a decisive influence on Aquinas’s famous “trea- tise on law” in the Summa of Theology. In this paper, I analyze Thomas’s mature work on the natural law in STh I–II, qq. 90–108 and show how the roots of this view can be traced to the earliest Church, especially in the writings of the second century bishop and martyr, St. Irenaeus of Lyons. Of special interest is how Irenaeus transformed the Greek-Aristotelian notion of physis and “natural law” within the context of his discus- sion of the goodness of creation and the Mosaic Law, contrary to the popular Gnostic views of his day. Keywords: Thomas Aquinas; Ireneaus; natural law; divine law; Mosaic Law; Old Law; Adversus Haereses. 1. A Common Narrative about the Natural Law: The Missing Historical Piece common narrative about the natural law divides its development
    [Show full text]
  • THE PHILOSOPHY BOOK George Santayana (1863-1952)
    Georg Hegel (1770-1831) ................................ 30 Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) ................. 32 Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach (1804-1872) ...... 32 John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) .......................... 33 Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) ..................... 33 Karl Marx (1818-1883).................................... 34 Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) ................ 35 Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914).............. 35 William James (1842-1910) ............................ 36 The Modern World 1900-1950 ............................. 36 Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) .................... 37 Ahad Ha'am (1856-1927) ............................... 38 Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) ............. 38 Edmund Husserl (1859–1938) ....................... 39 Henri Bergson (1859-1941) ............................ 39 Contents John Dewey (1859–1952) ............................... 39 Introduction....................................................... 1 THE PHILOSOPHY BOOK George Santayana (1863-1952) ..................... 40 The Ancient World 700 BCE-250 CE..................... 3 Miguel de Unamuno (1864-1936) ................... 40 Introduction Thales of Miletus (c.624-546 BCE)................... 3 William Du Bois (1868-1963) .......................... 41 Laozi (c.6th century BCE) ................................. 4 Philosophy is not just the preserve of brilliant Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) ........................ 41 Pythagoras (c.570-495 BCE) ............................ 4 but eccentric thinkers that it is popularly Max Scheler
    [Show full text]
  • The Well-Trained Theologian
    THE WELL-TRAINED THEOLOGIAN essential texts for retrieving classical Christian theology part 1, patristic and medieval Matthew Barrett Credo 2020 Over the last several decades, evangelicalism’s lack of roots has become conspicuous. Many years ago, I experienced this firsthand as a university student and eventually as a seminary student. Books from the past were segregated to classes in church history, while classes on hermeneutics and biblical exegesis carried on as if no one had exegeted scripture prior to the Enlightenment. Sometimes systematics suffered from the same literary amnesia. When I first entered the PhD system, eager to continue my theological quest, I was given a long list of books to read just like every other student. Looking back, I now see what I could not see at the time: out of eight pages of bibliography, you could count on one hand the books that predated the modern era. I have taught at Christian colleges and seminaries on both sides of the Atlantic for a decade now and I can say, in all honesty, not much has changed. As students begin courses and prepare for seminars, as pastors are trained for the pulpit, they are not required to engage the wisdom of the ancient past firsthand or what many have labelled classical Christianity. Such chronological snobbery, as C. S. Lewis called it, is pervasive. The consequences of such a lopsided diet are now starting to unveil themselves. Recent controversy over the Trinity, for example, has manifested our ignorance of doctrines like eternal generation, a doctrine not only basic to biblical interpretation and Christian orthodoxy for almost two centuries, but a doctrine fundamental to the church’s Christian identity.
    [Show full text]
  • Phantom Paths from Problems to Equations
    Archimedes and the Angel: Phantom Paths from Problems to Equations Fabio Acerbi CNRS, UMR 8163 ‘Savoirs, textes, langage’, Lille [email protected] Introduction This paper is a critical review of Reviel Netz’ The Transformation of Mathematics in the Early Mediterranean World.1 Its aim is to show that Netz’ methods of inquiry are too often unsatisfactory and to argue briefly for a substantially different interpretation of the evi- dence which he adduces. These two aims are pursued in parallel throughout the review and can hardly be disjoined. The review is uncommonly long and uncommonly direct, at times perhaps even a trifle vehement, in criticizing the methods and conclusions displayed in the book. There are two reasons for this. First, the transforma- tion of Academic scholarship into a branch of the editorial business and, very recently, into an expanding division of the media-driven star-system, has dramatically reduced the time left to study primary sources, to get properly informed of works by other scholars,2 and even just to read more than once what was written as a first draft. Second, at the same time, it is increasingly difficult to find serious reviews. Though the number of reviews and book-notices is explod- ing, it is clear that most reviews are written just to get a copy of an otherwise too expensive book. At any rate, the current policy is to keep sharp criticisms, if any, hidden under a seemingly gentle stylistic surface. The present paper is organized as follows. In the first section, I present Archimedes’ problem; in the next, I report the contents 1 R.
    [Show full text]
  • Intellectual Elitism and the Need for Faith in Maimonides and Aquinas
    INTELLECTUAL ELITISM AND THE NEED FOR FAITH Intellectual elitism and the need for faith in Maimonides and Aquinas Elitismo intelectual y la necesidad de la fe según Maimónides y Tomás de Aquino FRANCISCO ROMERO CARRASQUILLO Departamento de Humanidades Universidad Panamericana 45010 Zapopan, Jalisco (México) [email protected] Abstract: In his Commentary on Boethius’ De Resumen: En su Comentario al De Trinitate de Trinitate 3.1, Aquinas cites Maimonides as Boecio 3.1, Tomás de Aquino cita a Maimóni- giving fi ve reasons for the need for faith. Yet des, de quien afi rma que presenta cinco ra- interpreters tend to see Aquinas as “stand- zones a favor de la necesidad de la fe. Los in- ing Maimonides on his head”. In this paper, térpretes suelen ver a Tomás de Aquino como the author places Maimonides’ text (on the si “hubiera puesto a Maimónides de cabeza”. five reasons for concealing metaphysics) En el presente artículo se retoma el texto de within the context of his rational mysticism Maimónides (acerca de las cinco razones por and compares it to Aquinas’ own Christian las que la metafísica debe reservarse a los mystical thought in an attempt to show that doctos y ocultarse a las masas), y se sitúa en el in his own mind Aquinas is not misquoting, contexto de su misticismo racional. Compa- reversing, or doing violence to Maimonides’ rándolo con el pensamiento místico cristiano text; rather, Aquinas is completing Maimon- de Tomás de Aquino, se muestra cómo éste ides’ natural, rational mysticism with what he no está citando erróneamente, ni invirtiendo understands to be the supernatural perfec- ni violentando el texto de Maimónides; más tion of the theological virtue of faith.
    [Show full text]