DOCSLIB.ORG

As with the “Bibliography of Primary Sources,” in the Index All Names of Authors Who Worked Before Roughly 1500 Are Alphabetized According to Their Given Names

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
As with the “Bibliography of Primary Sources,” in the Index All Names of Authors Who Worked Before Roughly 1500 Are Alphabetized According to Their Given Names Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-11714-2 - Medieval Trinitarian Thought from Aquinas to Ockham Russell L. Friedman Index More information Index As with the “Bibliography of primary sources,” in the index all names of authors who worked before roughly 1500 are alphabetized according to their given names. Names of medieval authors are anglicized (e.g., William Ockham, Henry of Ghent) except where it has become standard usage in English to use their foreign-language names (e.g., Hervaeus Natalis). Subentries for “secondary literature” refer to the “Annotated bibliography of selected secondary literature.” ase, Father as, in John Duns Scotus 109–10 appropriation of trinitarian names act of understanding, see intellectual act in Durand of St. Pourc¸ain 72–73 action and passion, Aristotelian categories explained 71–72 of 15–16 See also Word, divine, as Son’s proper active spiration, see spiration, active name acts, personal, see operation Aristotle (the Philosopher) Adam Wodeham and the categories 7–8 biography 146 and hylomorphism 140n.4 secondary literature 180, 185 operations come from distinct vs. Walter Chatton on personal individuals 22 properties and personal on relation 8 constitution 153–55, 166 on relation, and action and passion Adams, Marilyn McCord 184 15–16, 18, 25 agent intellect 77, 78 (Diagram F) relatives are at once by nature 23n.19 in Henry of Ghent 83–84 theory of cognition 77–79 in Thomas Aquinas 79–80 Arius (Arian heresy) 7, 153–55 Alexander of Hales 181 attributes, divine, see distinction between Alphonsus Vargas of Toledo 166 divine attributes, and strong use of Angelini, Giuseppe 185 the psychological model; intellect, Anselm of Canterbury 2 divine; will, divine and emanation account 18, 56 Augustine of Hippo 2 anti-trinitarianism 186 appealed to by Gregory of Rimini 161 187 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-11714-2 - Medieval Trinitarian Thought from Aquinas to Ockham Russell L. Friedman Index More information 188 Index Augustine of Hippo (cont.) Church Fathers, and formulation of appealed to by William Ockham 130–31 doctrine of Trinity 1 on concept formation and psychological cognitive theory, later-medieval model of Trinity 52–55, 61, 75, described 77–78 94–95, 114 secondary literature 183 and emanation account 18, 56, 73 common sense, see senses influence on later-medieval concept compatibilism 68n.16 theory 76–77, 78–79, 80–81, 82–83, concept 84–87, 90–91 act-object theory of 80, 81–82 and relation account 7–10 adverbial theory of 81–82 secondary literature 183 See also intellectual act; word, mental authority, in later-medieval trinitarian condemnation of view that Word is not theology 169, 178 exclusively Son’s personal name Avignon 120, 124, 146 73n.21 connotative distinction, see distinction, Bainton, Roland H. 186 connotative Barnes, Michel Rene´ 179 constitution, personal (divine) belief, vs. demonstration, see fideism explained 6–7, 139 Bible 114; see also New Testament in Godfrey of Fontaines 139–41, 156–57 Boethius (Anicius Manlius Severinus) 2 Gregory of Rimini rejects 159–61 and relation account 7–10 in Henry of Ghent 139–41, 156–57 Bombolognus of Bologna 30 in John Duns Scotus 139, 141–42 Bonaventure in Peter Auriol and William Ockham 139 contrasted with Pecham 37–39 Praepositinus rejects 143–44 on demonstrability of Trinity 166–67 Robert Holcot rejects 156–57 diverse interpretations of his trinitarian and twofold nature of divine relations ideas 12n.5, 20n.14, 180–81 139 and Franciscan trinitarian tradition 5–6, Walter Chatton rejects 150–52 39–40, 61–62, 94 continuity, between thirteenth- and on generation and Father’s constitution fourteenth-century thought 97–98, 21, 23–30, 32–33 165–66; see also discontinuity on innascibility as primity 27–30 counterfactuality of question of Holy Spirit on mode of reference 12 not proceeding from Son 42, 43, on personal properties (vs. Aquinas) 44–45; see also Holy Spirit, Son’s 19–30 passim role in spiration of vs. Praepositinus on personal Courtenay, William J. 186 constitution 162 creeds, ecumenical, and formulation of on psychological model of Trinity doctrine of Trinity 1 61–62 Cross, Richard 180, 183, 184 on relation account 11–13 secondary literature 178, 180–81 Damnamus, see Fourth Lateran Council as thirteenth-century thinker 96 Decker, Bruno 31n.26, 179 Boureau, Alain 182 Decorte, Jos 182 demonstration, and the Gilsonian paradigm Cahors 113 134–37 categories, Aristotelian 7–8; see also action discontinuity, between thirteenth- and and passion, Aristotelian categories fourteenth-century trinitarian of; relation, Aristotelian category thought 98, 165–66 of See also continuity © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-11714-2 - Medieval Trinitarian Thought from Aquinas to Ockham Russell L. Friedman Index More information Index 189 discursive reasoning Peter Auriol rejects 115 in Henry of Ghent (investigation) 83–84, William Ockham rejects 125–26, 85–87 184 in John Duns Scotus (inquisition) 86–91 formal, between divine essence and disparate relations as the emanations personal properties, in John Duns in Dominican trinitarian tradition 172 Scotus 141–42, 150–51 in Franciscan trinitarian tradition 40–41, in God and divine simplicity, see search 171 for simplicity in John Pecham 42, 44–45 hypostatic vs. personal 21n.16 dispositional knowledge, see memory, nested, see nested distinctions intellectual rational between the divine attributes 66, distinction 101–03 between divine attributes, and strong use real personal of psychological model 59–60, in the Trinity 2, 3 63–64, 101, 172, 173 vs. essential distinction 6–7 Dominican criticism of 101–03 se ipsis (in and of themselves), between Francis of Marchia criticizes divine emanations 57–58 120–24 se ipsis (in and of themselves), between in Henry of Ghent 104–05 divine persons in John Baconthorpe 118–20 Adam Wodeham rejects 153–55 in John Duns Scotus 106–12 in Gregory of Rimini 161–63 in Peter Auriol 113–18 Henry of Ghent rejects 144–45, between the emanations (generation and 154n.21 spiration) in Praepositinus 143–44 in Aquinas and Dominican trinitarian in Robert Holcot 157 tradition 64–65, 101–03, 173 in Walter Chatton 150–52 in Francis of Marchia 123–24 See also property, personal (divine), in Franciscan trinitarian tradition, identical with person and essence John Pecham, and Henry of Ghent Dominican order, trinitarian tradition of 56–59, 63–64, 73–75, 101, 103–05, described 172–73 114–15, 171 on distinction between emanations in John Duns Scotus 106–12, 64–65 114–15 and Franciscan trinitarian tradition in John of Naples 69–70 18–19, 40–42, 123–24, 138–39, in Peter Auriol 114–18 140–41 connotative on Holy Spirit’s spiration 40–42 in John Baconthorpe 118–20 on personal constitution 140–41 in Peter Auriol 116–18 rejection of “proof” of Trinity in William Ockham 125–26 105–06 emanational vs. relational 38–40; see also and relation account 5–6, 30–31 nested distinctions secondary literature 179, 181–82 essential vs. real personal in the Trinity vs. strong use of the psychological 6–7 model 60, 64–69, 101–03, formal, between divine attributes (and 105–06 attributes and essence) and Thomas Aquinas 5–6, 61–62, 65–67, explained 108 98, 101–03 Francis of Marchia rejects 120–23 dual nature of divine relations, see relations, in John Duns Scotus 93, 107–12, divine, twofold nature of 183 Dumont, Stephen D. 180, 183 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-11714-2 - Medieval Trinitarian Thought from Aquinas to Ockham Russell L. Friedman Index More information 190 Index Durand of St. Pourc¸ain 30, 51 as unique source of both emanations metaphorical use of psychological model in Dominicans 65–67 72–73, 95, 128 in Francis of Marchia 121–24 Peter Auriol criticizes on psychological John Duns Scotus rejects 107–08, model 113–14 121–23 rejects “proof” of Trinity 106n.6 in William Ockham 126–27 secondary literature 181 See also distinction, between divine Durandellus 181 attributes, and strong use of psychological model emanation account of personal distinction Eustace of Arras 31 compared with relation account 6–7, explanation and simplicity in trinitarian 138–39 theology 99, 112, 119–20, 141–42, explained 15–18 144–45, 168–69; see also search for in Franciscan trinitarian tradition 5–6, 31, simplicity 45 in Henry of Ghent 48–49 faith and reason in John Pecham 57–58 in Gregory of Rimini 168–69 emanations, divine in Robert Holcot 157–58, 168–69 vs. divine relations in Bonaventure 21–30 in Walter Chatton 168–69 vs. divine relations in Thomas Aquinas in William Ockham 168–69, 184 21–23, 25 See also Gilson, Etienne,´ and “Gilsonian explained 16–17 Paradigm” in Peter Auriol 115 Faith, the, see fideism; sola fide See also distinction, between the Father, divine emanations; innascibility; as asein John Duns Scotus 109–10 generation; spiration and divine attributes as source of Emery, Gilles 181 emanations 103–05, 110 eminent containment in Francis of Marchia personal constitution of 20–30, 32–40, 121–23 49, 171, 172 essence, divine See also innascibility, as primity formally distinct from personal property, fideism, in fourteenth-century thought in John Duns Scotus 141–42, 134–37, 165–70; see also revelation; 150–51 sola fide identical with person and property filiation 9 Adam Wodeham rejects 153–55 Filioque 41–42 in Gregory of Rimini 159–64 Flores, Juan Carlos 182 in Robert Holcot 155–57 fontal plenitude, see innascibility, as primity in Walter Chatton 148–50 formal distinction, see distinction, formal as partial source of divine emanations formal non-identity, see distinction, formal in John Duns Scotus 109–12, 120–23 Fourth Lateran Council, on Trinity Francis of Marchia rejects 120–23 (Damnamus) 147, 160n.31 William Ockham rejects 126–27 France 113 as quasi-material in Godfrey of Fontaines Francis of Marchia 96 and Henry of Ghent 139–41 biography 120, 124 role in personal constitution 138–39 on distinction between the divine in Adam Wodeham 153–55 attributes 122n.26 See also constitution, personal divine essence is unique source of both (divine) emanations (vs.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Duns Scotus on the Common Nature and the Individual Differentia
    c Peter King, Philosophical Topics 20 (1992), 50–76 DUNS SCOTUS ON THE COMMON NATURE* Introduction COTUS holds that in each individual there is a principle that accounts for its being the very thing it is and a formally S distinct principle that accounts for its being the kind of thing it is; the former is its individual differentia, the latter its common nature.1 These two principles are not on a par: the common nature is prior to the individual differentia, both independent of it and indifferent to it. When the individual differentia is combined with the common nature, the result is a concrete individual that really differs from all else and really agrees with others of the same kind. The individual differentia and the common nature thereby explain what Scotus takes to stand in need of explanation: the indi- viduality of Socrates on the one hand, the commonalities between Socrates * An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 26th International Congress on Medieval Studies, sponsored by the Medieval Institute, held at Western Michigan University 9–12 May 1991. All translations are my own. Scotus’s writings may be found in the following editions: (1) Vaticana: Iohannis Duns Scoti Doctoris Subtilis et Mariani opera omnia, ed. P. Carolus Bali¸cet alii, Typis Polyglottis Vaticanae 1950– Vols. I–VII, XVI–XVIII. (2) Wadding-Viv`es: Joannis Duns Scoti Doctoris Subtilis Ordinis Minorum opera omnia, ed. Luke Wadding, Lyon 1639; republished, with only slight alterations, by L. Viv`es,Paris 1891–1895. Vols. I–XXVI. References are to the Vatican edition wherever possible, to the Wadding-Viv`esedition otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • The Univocity of Substance and the Formal Distinction of Attributes: the Role of Duns Scotus in Deleuze's Reading of Spinoza Nathan Widder
    parrhesia 33 · 2020 · 150-176 the univocity of substance and the formal distinction of attributes: the role of duns scotus in deleuze's reading of spinoza nathan widder This paper examines the role played by medieval theologian John Duns Scotus in Gilles Deleuze’s reading of Spinoza’s philosophy of expressive substance; more generally, it elaborates a crucial moment in the development of Deleuze’s philosophy of sense and difference. Deleuze contends that Spinoza adapts and extends Duns Scotus’s two most influential theses, the univocity of being and formal distinction, despite neither appearing explicitly in Spinoza’s writings. “It takes nothing away from Spinoza’s originality,” Deleuze declares, “to place him in a perspective that may already be found in Duns Scotus” (Deleuze, 1992, 49).1 Nevertheless, the historiographic evidence is clearly lacking, leaving Deleuze to admit that “it is hardly likely that” Spinoza had even read Duns Scotus (359n28). Indeed, the only support he musters for his speculation is Spinoza’s obvious in- terests in scholastic metaphysical and logical treatises, the “probable influence” of the Scotist-informed Franciscan priest Juan de Prado on his thought, and the fact that the problems Duns Scotus addresses need not be confined to Christian thought (359–360n28). The paucity of evidence supporting this “use and abuse” of history, however, does not necessarily defeat the thesis. Like other lineages Deleuze proposes, the one he traces from Duns Scotus to Spinoza, and subsequently to Nietzsche, turns not on establishing intentional references by one thinker to his predecessor, but instead on showing how the borrowings and adaptations asserted to create the connec- tion make sense of the way the second philosopher surmounts blockages he faces while responding to issues left unaddressed by the first.
    [Show full text]
  • Blander Diss Commented Normore Blander Replies V3
    UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Dependence, Separability, and Theories of Identity and Distinction in Late Medieval Philosophy: Case Studies from Scotus and Ockham Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6wh8q15d Author Blander, Joshua Publication Date 2014 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Dependence, Separability, and Theories of Identity and Distinction in Late Medieval Philosophy: Case Studies from Scotus and Ockham A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy by Joshua Blander 2014 © Copyright by Joshua Blander 2014 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Dependence, Separability, and Theories of Identity and Distinction in Late Medieval Philosophy: Case Studies from Scotus and Ockham by Joshua Blander Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy University of California, Los Angeles, 2014 Professor Calvin Normore, Chair Theories of distinctions surface some of the most fundamental elements of metaphysical and logical inquiry. For many medieval philosophers, theories of distinctions provided some semblance of rational order and unity to metaphysical, logical and theological questions. The two philosophers on which I focus, John Duns Scotus and William Ockham, discuss distinctions and metaphysical adjuncts in a variety of philosophical and theological contexts. When discussing Scotus, I emphasize his development of a robust theory of identity and distinction. I give special attention to his accounts of what he calls qualified non-identity or qualified distinction, which he surprisingly says is compatible with real identity. When I turn my attention to Ockham, I focus on his use of the real distinction in the context of the common fourteenth century disputes about universals.
    [Show full text]
  • Carmel: the Construction of a Discalced Identity in John of the Cross Thomas J
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2008 Return to Carmel: The Construction of a Discalced Identity in John of the Cross Thomas J. Neal Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES RETURN TO CARMEL: THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DISCALCED IDENTITY IN JOHN OF THE CROSS By THOMAS NEAL A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Religion in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Fall Semester, 2008 Copyright © 2009 Thomas Neal All Rights Reserved The members of the Committee approve the Dissertation of Thomas Neal defended on December 12, 2008. _______________________________ John Corrigan Professor Directing Dissertation _______________________________ Nancy Warren Outside Committee Member _______________________________ Amanda Porterfield Committee Member _______________________________ John Kelsay Committee Member The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS John Donne once wrote, “No man is an Island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the Continent, a part of the main.” The journey toward a Ph.D uniquely evidences this fact, and the cloud of humanity that has carried me to the successful completion of this dissertation project is truly a vast and lovely cloud. So I begin with the disclaimer that the procession of names I list here in no way reflects the entirety of those to whom justice demands my offerings of gratitude. First, to the man Juan de Yepes, later known in religion as Juan de la Cruz, I gratefully acknowledge the numberless acts of wonder his life and writings awakened in me.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 958 H-France Review Vol. 10 (December 2010), No. 224 Stephen
    H-France Review Volume 10 (2010) Page 958 H-France Review Vol. 10 (December 2010), No. 224 Stephen F. Brown, Thomas Dewender and Theo Kobusch, eds., Philosophical Debates at Paris in the Early Fourteenth Century, Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters 102. Leiden and Boston: E. J. Brill, 2009. xviii + 519. Table, indices of manuscripts, names, and subjects. $231.00 U.S., 162 € (hb.). ISBN 978 90 04 17566 2. Review by William J. Courtenay, University of Wisconsin-Madison. The early fourteenth century has become a particularly active area of research in medieval philosophy and theology in the last two decades. Interest in Oxford thought led the way. Building upon the earlier publication of the works of Richard Campsale, William of Ockham, and the Lectura Secunda of Adam Wodeham, we now have editions of the works of Walter Chatton and Henry of Harclay, and questions from Thomas Wylton, Walter Burley, Richard Fitzralph, and Thomas Bradwardine. As regards Paris, the ongoing critical edition of the opera omnia of John Duns Scotus and a portion of Peter Auriol’s commentary on the Sentences is now been followed by projects for critical editions of the rest of Auriol’s commentary and the Sentences commentaries of Durand of St. Pourçain, Francis of Marchia, and Gerard Odonis. Philosophical Debates brings together many of those who are leading the research field on Parisian thought in the early fourteenth century. The essays themselves are the result of a joint project between Stephen Brown at Boston College and Thomas Dewender at Bonn, who hosted two conferences on this theme at their respective institutions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Medieval Social Epistemologies of Augustine and Aquinas
    Knowing and Trusting: The Medieval Social Epistemologies of Augustine and Aquinas by Matthew Kent Siebert A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy University of Toronto 2014 © Copyright by Matthew Kent Siebert, 2014 Knowing and Trusting The Medieval Social Epistemologies of Augustine and Aquinas Matthew Kent Siebert Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy University of Toronto 2014 Abstract This dissertation is an introductory exploration of two influential medieval thinkers, Augustine and Aquinas, on the topic of testimony. I explain how Augustine’s view that testimony is a source of knowledge (notitia) developed through four stages, and argue that on Augustine’s view testimonial belief is justified inferentially. I argue that Aquinas thinks some testimonial belief is justified inferentially, and some is justified by adhering to the speaker as the formal object of one’s belief, on the grounds that the speaker is truthful. I argue that these provide knowledge when they provide cognitio. And I argue that Aquinas’s view can be developed into a plausible account of testimonial trust and trustworthiness. ii Acknowledgments I am extremely grateful for the guidance and support of Peter King, Martin Pickavé, and Jennifer Nagel in the writing of this dissertation. I am also grateful to Deborah Black, Michael Siebert, Simona Vucu, and Ian Drummond, for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts of some of these chapters. And I am grateful to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the Government of Ontario, and the University of Toronto for financial support.
    [Show full text]
  • The Production of Carmelite Vernacular Writings in Late
    ‘FOR EDIFICACYON OF MANY SAULES’: THE PRODUCTION OF CARMELITE VERNACULAR WRITINGS IN LATE MEDIEVAL ENGLAND by Johan Bergström-Allen, B.A. (York), M.Phil. (Oxon) This paper was given by Johan at the Université de Fribourg, Switzerland, on 9th June 2004. He would be grateful for any comments and corrections, and will happily supply full references for enquirers. Please e-mail him: [email protected] Bonjour, guten tag, good morning! I’m very grateful to Dr. Denis Renevey for inviting me to speak to you about my research into the production of Carmelite writings in English in the late Middle Ages. My topic is rather obscure, so I think it needs some introduction. I propose to begin my talk by giving you some background information about the friars in medieval England, before looking at two specific Carmelite writers. In my research I am trying to analyse the literature produced in the vernacular (which in this context means English) by the Carmelites in the two centuries preceeding their suppression in England. The Carmelites are an ancient religious order in the Catholic Christian tradition, and I am interested in their entire bibliographic culture, in other words, the way that they – as a network of communities – produced, copied, and read texts in English, as well as in other languages. I wonder how many of you know what I mean by the term ‘Carmelite’. Most people, if they have heard of Carmelites at all, think of nuns, religious sisters, associated with Teresa of Avila and Thérèse of Lisiuex. This is certainly the best known face of the Carmelite Order today.
    [Show full text]
  • Where There Sentences Commentaries? Chris Schabel
    Where there Sentences commentaries? Chris Schabel To cite this version: Chris Schabel. Where there Sentences commentaries?. Pascale Bermon; Isabelle Moulin. Commenter au Moyen Âge, Vrin, pp.243-265, 2020, 978-2-7116-2925-1. hal-03175784 HAL Id: hal-03175784 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03175784 Submitted on 22 Mar 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. 1 ERC project 771589 Were There Sentences Commentaries? Chris Schabel* Terminology A search through the Universal Short Title Catalogue (USTC), WorldCat, Google Books, the SIEPM website,1 and other online sources for incunabula and early printed books revealed that by 1500 what we now call "Sentences commentaries" or "commentaries on the Sentences" by 26 authors had been printed in whole or in part close to 100 times.2 Nevertheless, according to these online sources, only ten printings by a mere three of these authors are entitled something like "commentaries": the Franciscan Richard of Mediavilla's Commentum was first published in 1473 and then four more times before 1500, the Franciscan Bonaventure's Commentarius came out twice in 1477 and then once more before the end of the century, and the Augustinian Giles of Rome's Commentum was printed in 1482 and again in 1492.
    [Show full text]
  • General Introduction
    MP_A02.qxd 11/17/06 5:26 PM Page 1 General Introduction Medieval Philosophy in Perspective In the modern mind, the adjective “medieval” has often been associated with ideas of darkness, dogmatism, oppression, and barbarity. This should not be surprising, if we con- sider how modernity came to define itself, precisely in opposition to the medieval tradition, as the Renaissance, the re-birth of ancient learning, the Reformation of a corrupt church, the Enlightenment after an age of darkness, an Age of Reason after an age of ignorance and blind faith. Even today, this mentality has its visible effects. To the intellectual reflexes of “the modern mind” referred to above, the very phrase “medieval philosophy” until fairly recently sounded almost like an oxymoron, indeed, so much so that in modern curricula of the his- tory of philosophy the medieval period was barely mentioned, and even nowadays it is skipped by some philosophy departments, boldly leaping from ancient philosophy directly to the study of Descartes (ignoring about two thousand years of Western intellectual history). To be sure, this situation is happily changing. In the larger scheme of things this is prob- ably due to the fact that we live in a postmodern period, in which the grand, defining ideas of modernity itself have become at least questionable, if not discredited, as a result of mod- ern historical experience (think world wars, industrialized genocides, global exploitation of people and nature, the manipulative uses of “values,” ideologies and religions, etc.). This postmodern perspective, by revealing the various limitations of the “grand ideas” of mod- ernity, naturally prompts historical and philosophical reflection on their validity in history, and thus on their emergence from developments in the medieval period.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae John F
    Curriculum vitae John F. Wippel Degrees B.A., The Catholic University of America, 1955 M.A. (philosophy), The Catholic University of America, 1956 S.T.L., The Catholic University of America, 1960 Ph.D. (philosophy), University of Louvain, dissertation defended, April 1963 (Summa cum laude). Degree conferred, January 6, 1965, after publication of first subsequent article. Post-doctoral degree: Louvain-la-Neuve: Maître-Agrégé de l'Ecole Saint Thomas d'Aquin, May 22, 1981 Faculty Positions 1960-1961 and 1963-1965, Instructor, School of Philosophy, The Catholic University of America 1965-1967, Assistant Professor, School of Philosophy, The Catholic University of America 1967-1972, Associate Professor, School of Philosophy, The Catholic University of America Spring 1969, Visiting Associate Professor, University of California, San Diego 1972 to present, Ordinary Professor, School of Philosophy, The Catholic University of America Theodore Basselin Professor of Philosophy, chair awarded in 2001 Academic Awards and Distinctions Basselin Scholarship (CUA), 1953-1956 Penfield Scholarship (CUA), 1961-1963 (for doctoral studies at Louvain) National Endowment for the Humanities Younger Humanist Fellowship, 1970-1971, Maître-Agrégé from Louvain-la-Neuve (see above) Cardinal Mercier Prize from Louvain, May 1981, for best book on a metaphysical theme in the previous two years (see The Metaphysical Thought of Godfrey of Fontaines) National Endowment for the Humanities Fellowship for Independent Study and Research, 1984-1985 academic year Aquinas Medal, American Catholic Philosophical Association, 1999 The Catholic University of America's Alumni Association Achievement Award for Research and Scholarship, October 27, 2001 Pontifical Academy of Saint Thomas Aquinas, Fellow (Professor Ordinarius), September 2003; Emeritus, 2013 Doctorate of Letters in Mediaeval Studies honoris causa, conferred by the Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Toronto, October 1, 2005 The Catholic University of America Provost Award.
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE Stephen D
    CURRICULUM VITAE Stephen D. Dumont May 17, 2019 E DUCATION B.A. Philosophy and English, Wabash College (May, 1974; Phi Beta Kappa) M.A. Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto (December, 1976) M.S.L. (Licentiate in Mediaeval Studies) Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, University of Toronto (October, 1979) Ph.D. Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto (Conferred February, 1983) Thesis: Henry of Ghent and John Duns Scotus on the Existence of God. Supervisor: Armand A. Maurer A REA OF RESEARCH Medieval philosophy and theology A CADEMIC A PPOINTMENTS 2007-2010: Chairperson, Department of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame 2006- Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame 2001-2006: Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame 1995-2001: Joint Appointment, Associate Professor, Centre for Medieval Studies and Department of Philosophy, University of Toronto 1988-1995: Senior Fellow, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies and Associate Professor, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto 1985-1988: Junior Fellow, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies and Assistant Professor, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto 1982-1985: Assistant Professor, School of Philosophy, Catholic University of America 1981-1982: Instructor, School of Philosophy, Catholic University of America S CHOLARSHIPS AND F ELLOWSHIPS 1980-1981: Ontario Graduate Scholarship, University of Toronto 1978-1980: College Fellowship, Trinity College, University of Toronto 1977-1980: Open Fellowships, University of Toronto G RANTS • Grant from Office of the Vice-President for Research ($70,000) to continue work on Critical Edition of John Duns Scotus, Reportationes Parisienses. Co-PI with Kent Emery. • Summer Research Institute at Harris Manchester College, Oxford University, June, 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 UNIT 4 DUN SCOTUS and WILLIAM of OCKHAM Contents
    UNIT 4 DUN SCOTUS AND WILLIAM OF OCKHAM Contents 4.0. Objectives 4.1. Introduction 4.2. John Duns Scotus 4.3. William of Ockham 4.4. Let Us Sum Up 4.5. Key Words 4.6. Further Readings and References 4.7. Answers to Check Your Progress 4.0. OBJECTIVES In this Unit, placing ourselves in the post-Thomistic period, we focus our attention on two Franciscans: John Duns Scotus and William of Ockham, in their commonness and disagreement with the Dominican Thomas Aquinas. By the end of this Unit you should be able to: • Clarify the positions held by Aquinas and Scotus; • Explain the univocity of being; • Distinguish formal distinction and individuation; • Clarify psychology and ethics of Scotus; and • Explain Universals according to Ockham, and his principle of simplicity 4.1. INTRODUCTION The thirteenth century was the golden age of scholastic speculation. With the beginning of the fourteenth century the signs of a speculative decline or disintegration became obvious. What hastened this decline is the overemphasis on language and logic, together with an increasing scepticism about the power of reason, so confidently proposed by Aquinas. The long-standing marriage of philosophy and religion began to come apart during this time. In the late scholastic period or in the post-Thomistic period two Franciscans beckon our attention: John Duns Scotus and William of Ockham. What is common to both is their disagreement with the Dominican Thomas Aquinas. 4.2. JOHN DUNS SCOTUS 1 LIFE AND WORKS Little is known of the early life of Duns Scotus. He was ordained a priest on March 17, 1291 and on that basis it is inferred that he was born early in 1266.
    [Show full text]