Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Open Access Dissertations Theses and Dissertations Fall 2013 The etM aphysics of Causation in the Creation Accounts of Avicenna and Aquinas Julie Ann Swanstrom Purdue University Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_dissertations Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Swanstrom, Julie Ann, "The eM taphysics of Causation in the Creation Accounts of Avicenna and Aquinas" (2013). Open Access Dissertations. 58. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_dissertations/58 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. Graduate School ETD Form 9 (Revised 12/07) PURDUE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL Thesis/Dissertation Acceptance This is to certify that the thesis/dissertation prepared By Julie A. Swanstrom Entitled The Metaphysics of Causation in the Creation Accounts of Avicenna and Aquinas Doctor of Philosophy For the degree of Is approved by the final examining committee: Jeffrey Brower Chair Jan Cover Dan Frank Paul Draper To the best of my knowledge and as understood by the student in the Research Integrity and Copyright Disclaimer (Graduate School Form 20), this thesis/dissertation adheres to the provisions of Purdue University’s “Policy on Integrity in Research” and the use of copyrighted material. Approved by Major Professor(s): ____________________________________Jeffrey Brower ____________________________________ Approved by: Matthias Steup 08/02/2013 Head of the Graduate Program Date THE METAPHYSICS OF CAUSATION IN THE CREATION ACCOUNTS OF AVICENNA AND AQUINAS A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Purdue University by Julie A. Swanstrom In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2013 Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana ii For my family, with gratitude to their support and encouragement. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my deep gratitude for those who have helped me with this project. Primarily, I would like to thank my dissertation committee for their work. Dan Frank encouraged me to pursue this topic, suggesting avenues to explore. Jan Cover provided me with helpful comments on my initial prospectus that allowed me to compose a much stronger dissertation. My dissertation director, Jeffrey Brower, deserves special thanks both for his support for and engagement with this project and for his support and encouragement throughout my graduate education. I would also like to thank Paul Draper for his questions and comments on the final draft of my dissertation. Attendees at the Aquinas and the Arabs conference in Paris in June, 2013 provided several important criticisms and helpful suggestions, so I thank Dr. Richard Taylor and Dr. Luis López-Farjeat for the opportunity to present. Over the course of my educational career, three individuals have (more than the many others) supported and encouraged me on this journey, so I offer special thanks to Dr. Nancey Murphy, Dr. Kimlyn Bender, and Mr. Leo Kallis. Most of all, I would like to thank the members of my family, who have each shown me grace, patience, encouragement—and, most gratifyingly—interest in my work as it progressed. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................................... v CHAPTER ONE: HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 1 Creation .................................................................................................................................... 2 Aristotelian Efficient Causation ........................................................................................ 13 Neoplatonic Emanation....................................................................................................... 18 Problem of Creation ............................................................................................................. 30 CHAPTER TWO: AVICENNA ON CREATING .................................................................... 40 A Neoplatonic Approach .................................................................................................... 40 Emanation as a Type of Efficient Causation .................................................................... 69 CHAPTER THREE: AQUINAS ON CREATING ................................................................... 96 An Aristotelian Approach ................................................................................................... 97 Efficient Causation without Patients ............................................................................... 119 Emanation as a Type of Aristotelian Efficient Causation ............................................ 132 CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................... 163 Comparison ......................................................................................................................... 163 Metaphysics of Causation .................................................................................................. 175 Aristotelian Efficient Causation and Neoplatonic Emanation as Creation ............... 190 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................... 203 VITA .................................................................................................................................................. 212 v ABSTRACT Swanstrom, Julie A., Ph.D. Purdue University, December 2013. The Metaphysics of Causation in the Creation Accounts of Avicenna and Aquinas. Major Professor: Jeffrey Brower. The medieval conception of monotheistic creation is this: God voluntarily creates the universe from nothing. Endorsed by medieval philosophers, this conception of creation is in tension with their understanding of causation more generally. Each theory of causation available—Aristotelian efficient causation in which an agent acts upon a patient, and Neoplatonic emanation in which beings are produced through a series of emanations—have attractive explanatory features, but neither theory aligns perfectly with divine creation. Since God acts to create, efficient causation seems to include creating; yet, efficient causation is not causation ex nihilo. Since emanation accounts for producing being ex nihilo, it seems to include creating, but emanation is neither voluntary nor non-necessary production. Thus, medieval philosophers face what I call the ‘problem of creation’: they must either (a) deny the apparent contradiction; (b) modify their understanding of creation; or (c) develop an entirely new account of causation that is compatible with creation. In my dissertation, I examine the causal theories of two prominent philosophers, Avicenna and Aquinas. Both attempt to articulate comprehensive causal theories which include an analysis of God’s creation of the universe. Despite their distinct cultural and religious milieus, both men describe creating as an action performed by God. I examine how vi each navigates commitments to his faith tradition and to both Neoplatonic emanation and Aristotelian efficient causation. On the surface, their theories appear similar: they each attempt to solve the problem of creation by selecting option (a). However, this similarity masks underlying differences: each privileges one causal theory in his creation account, and this has implications for understanding their causal theories. In chapter one, I clarify the problem of creation by discussing each of these traditions in detail. To both Avicenna and Aquinas, solving the problem by selecting option (b) is undesirable, for each would be loath to jettison the claim that God creates either ex nihilo or voluntarily. Option (c) is equally undesirable given the medieval inclination to retain as much of one’s heritage as possible. Each selects option (a), but they do so in distinct ways that are explored in chapters two and three. In chapter two, I contend that Avicenna assumes the truth of Neoplatonic emanation as a model of causation in creation, but he explains that Neoplatonic emanation is not incompatible with divine creation. Avicenna does not take every characteristic of Neoplatonic emanation to be essential to that model, explaining that God emanates voluntarily and non-necessarily (that is, God’s action is subject to no internal or external constraints). He also speaks of creating in terms of Aristotelian efficient causation, although to do so, he must develop (and defend developing) the implications of Aristotle’s explication of efficient causation. Efficient causation can be natural—involving an agent activating some potentiality in a patient—or metaphysical—involving an agent producing being ex nihilo. I argue that Avicenna prefers Neoplatonic emanation in understanding divine creation. In chapter three, I contend that Aquinas assumes the truth of Aristotelian efficient causation as a model of causation, but he explains that Aristotelian efficient causation is not vii incompatible with the Christian conception of creating. Aquinas, like Avicenna, develops the implications of Aristotelian efficient causation, and Aquinas understands efficient causation to be an action performed by an agent. Aquinas also speaks of creating in terms of emanation, which is both voluntary and non-necessary.