INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly firom the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely afiect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing firom left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 3 0 0 North Z eeb Road. Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9420981 Suarez on soul, will, and freedom Burlando, Giannina Leonora, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1994 UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 SUAREZ ON SOUL, WILL» AND FREEDOM DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Giannina L. Burlando, lie., M.A $ $ $ $ $ The Ohio State University 1994 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Ivan Boh Calvin Normore Tamar Rudavsky Adviser Department of Philosophy To Nelson and Luciano n ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation owes much to others. I feel deeply grateful in particular for intellectual contributions and for providing an outstanding environment to investigate aspects of later medieval philosophy to Professors Ivan Boh, Calvin Normore, Tamar Rudavsky and Peter King. As my principal adviser. Professor Boh generously and constantly provided me with encouragement and guidance over the several years that I have spent as graduate student at the Ohio State University. Professor Boh inspired this dissertation and contributed with suggestions, criticisms and textual corrections of both English and Latin writings. His insistence upon clarity and completeness helped me to improve my dissertation. I wish to express my deep gratitude and indebtness to Professor Normore. I feel very fortunate to have benefited from his excellent seminars on philosophical theology of various medieval thinkers, and also for counting with him as a member of my dissertation committee. His scrutiny of my dissertation pushed me to clarify different aspects of Suârez’s views, while his thoughtful questions open new further topics of investigation in the Scholastic core of medieval philosophy. m As my role model teacher, I am specially grateful to Professor Rudavs^; she constantly inspired me to improve my own teaching in different philosophy courses and provided me with encouragement, helpful advise and detailed corrections. I have also benefited from Professor Ring’s seminars and his diverse writings on Scholastic/Aristotehan philosophy. I wish to thank the Latin American Studies Program (LASP) of the Ohio State University for provided me with a fellowship to travel to Salamanca, Spain, to gather Suârez’s De A nim a manuscript and other fundamental sources for my dissertation. I also wish to express my unbounded gratitude to my parents for receiving their constant love and support. I also thank my sister, Silvana, for helping me enthusiastically to type earlier drafts of this work. Most than anyone my husband. Nelson, has been my source of love and fortitude in the accomplishment of this dissertation. In the deepest sense my accomplishment is the result of our joined effort during the years that we and our son, Luciano, spent in Columbus, Ohio. IV VTTA April 2, 1953 ............................................... Bom - Santiago, Chile 1974-1981 ............................................. lie., Philosophy Department, University of Chile, Chile 1979-1985 ................................................. Teaching Assistant Philosophy, University of Chile, Chile 1990................................................................. M.A, Philosophy Department, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1987 Graduate Fellow, Philosophy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1988-1992 Teaching Assistant, Philosophy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1992-Present ................................................. Assistant Professor,Philosophy, University of Chile, Chile FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Philosophy Minor Field: Later Medieval Philosophy TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................. iü VTTA....................................................................................................................... V TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................ ix INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER PAGE L SUAREZ ON THE NATURE AND STRUCTURE OF SOUL 12 1 Introduction to De A n im a .......................................................................14 2 Metaphysics of Soul ............................................................................... 17 3 Nature of Soul in General: its Ontological Status .................................. 25 4 Intensional Analysis of Soul in G en eral ............................................. 39 5 Soul and Body: The Role of Dispositions ......................................... 70 6 Internal Structure of Soul: Compound or Simple? and Intensional Analysis of Rational Soul’ in Particular ....................................................................................... 76 VI n. SUAREZ ON THE OPERATIONS OF THE WILL: METAPHYSICS OF W ILL ................................................................... 112 1 The WiU as Poteiwy ............................................................................ 116 2 The Will as Proximate Efficient Cause ............................................. 131 3 Metaphysical Account of the Freedom of the W ill ............................... 141 m. SUAREZ ON THE NATURE OF THE WILL: PSYCHOLOGY OF W ILL............................................... 163 1 The Will as Vital Appetitive Faculty .................................................. 163 2 The Vital Act of Willing: An Immanent A c t ..................................... 180 3 Analysis of Freedom in De A n im a ...................................................... 198 4 Litellect and W ill .................................................................................. 216 IV. SUAREZ ON RECONCILIATION: THEOLOGY OF W ILL 227 1 Contingency .......................................................................................... 230 2 Absolute and Conditional Future Contingent E vents .......................... 236 3 Possibility of Foreknowledge of Future Contingent Events ..................241 4 Analysis of Divine Knowledge: Middle Knowledge ............................ 242 5 Compatibility of Foreknowledge and Future Contingent Even 248 6 Grounds for the Truth of Categorical Future Contingent Propositions ...................................... 262 7 Grounds for the Truth of Conditional Subjunctive Contingent Propositions .............. 271 8 God’s Intuition and Representation of Conditional Events ..................281 vu C O N C L U SIO N ................................................................................................... 288 BIBLIOGRAPHY...............................................................................................294 viu LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 Suârez’s Structure of the Human Soul ............................................80 2 Acts of the Appetitive Faculty .......................................................202 IX INTRODUCTION This investigation is concerned with one of the most subtle and comprehensive philosophical accounts regarding the nature and operations of the human wül, viz., that developed by Francisco Suârez, S.J. (Granada, 1548- Lisboa, 1617), during the pre-cartesian period. This dissertation intends to reconstruct and comment upon Suârez’s views on will as well as his argumentation for free will. Suârez’s argumentation for free-will appears within a network of assumptions and theories -among which his theory of middle knowledge played a crucial role- that constituted his compatibilist thesis (CT), i.e., the attempt to indeterministically reconcile human free-will with divine efficacy. The theological issue of reconciliation, which prompted most scholastic philosophical endeavors at Suârez’s time, relates to the contemporary dilemma that Anthony Kenny aptly expresses as ‘Is there room for genuine freedom of the will in a universe governed by scientific law?’. This ultimate question,