Search results for: aquinas

Authors: Elizabeth Latham

Abstract:

Aquinas has long been revered by the Catholic Church as one of the greatest theologians of all time. His most well-known and widely respected theological work, the Summa Theologica has been referenced by countless members of the clergy in support of arguments for and about the existence of God. It is surprising, then, and important that one component in his ontological arguments seems to contradict a precept upheld by the Catechism, the Catholic Church’s comprehensive document detailing their theological positions and laws. In Summa Theologica, Thomas Aquinas argued that God’s eternal existence is both an observable and necessary quality. In the Catechism, the Catholic Church argues that souls in Hell are separated from God, and only souls in Heaven are like him. After introducing research on Philosophical Psychology and the natures of consciousness and pain, this paper comes to the conclusion that in order to reconcile the theology of the Catholic Church at large with that of Thomas Aquinas, one must somehow solve the following problem: if a soul must exist eternally to suffer eternally, it must be like God; and, if a soul is in Hell, it is completely separate from God and not like him at all. Thomas Aquinas deviates at this point from the current theological holdings of the Catholic Church, and this apparent discrepancy must be resolved if the Church hopes to use him going forward as a standard for natural theology.

Keywords: aquinas, catholic catechism, consciousness, philosophical psychology, summa theologica

Procedia PDF Downloads 162

Authors: Zeite Shumneiyang Koireng

Abstract:

Liberation is the act of liberating or the state of being liberated. Indian philosophy, in general, understands liberation as moksa, which etymological is derived from the Sanskrit root muc+ktin meaning to loose, set free, to let go, discharge, release, liberate, deliver, etc. According to Indian schools of thought, moksa is the highest value on realizing which nothing remains to be realized. It is the cessation of birth and death, all kinds of pain and at the same time, it is the realization of one’s own self. Sankara’s Advaita philosophy is based on the following propositions: Brahman is the only Reality; the world has apparent reality, and the soul is not different from Brahman. According to Sankara, Brahman is the basis on which the world form appears; it is the sustaining ground of all various modification. It is the highest self and the self of all reveals himself by dividing himself [ as it was in the form of various objects] in multiple ways. The whole world is the manifestation of the Supreme Being. Brahman modifying itself into the Atman or internal self of all things is the world. Since Brahman is the Upadhana karana of the world, the sruti speaks of the world as the modification of Brahman into the Atman of the effect. Contemplation as the fulfillment of man finds a radical foundation in Aquinas teaching concerning the natural end or as he also referred to it, natural desire. The third book of the Summa Contra Gentiles begins the study of happiness with a consideration of natural desire. According to him, all creatures, even those devoid of understanding are ordered to God as an ultimate end. Intrinsically, a part of every nature is a tendency or inclination, originating in the natural form and tendency toward the end for which the possessor of nature exists. It is the study of the nature and finality of inclination that Aquinas establishes through an argument of induction man’s Contemplation of God as the fulfillment of his nature. The present paper is attempted to critically approach two important, seminal and originated thought, representing Indian and Western traditions which mark on the thinking of their respective times. Both these thoughts- Advaitic concept of Liberation in the Indian tradition and the concept of Contemplation in Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Contra Gentiles’- confront directly the question of the ultimate meaning of human existence. According to Sankara, it is knowledge and knowledge alone which is the means of moksa and the highest knowledge is moksa itself. Liberation in Sankara Vedanta is attained as a process of purification of self, which gradually and increasingly turns into purer and purer intentional construction. Man’s inner natural tendency for Aquinas is towards knowledge. The human subject is driven to know more and more about reality and in particular about the highest reality. Contemplation of this highest reality is fulfillment in the philosophy of Aquinas. Rather, Contemplation is the perfect activity in man’s present state of existence.

Keywords: liberation, Brahman, contemplation, fulfillment

Procedia PDF Downloads 157

Authors: Elizabeth Latham

Abstract:

Aristotle’s definition of substance from Metaphysics is relevant to the Catholic transubstantiation of the Eucharist, the idea that the actual substance of bread and wine is replaced by the substance of the body and blood of Christ. Assuming the physiological nature of the subjects do not change, the Aristotelian view on the nature of substance seems to be incompatible with this belief, since bread and wine have essential qualities different from those of flesh and blood. However, based on a theological view of the essence of the body and blood of Christ as salvation along with the essence of Eucharist, transubstantiation can fit within Aristotle’s brackets. This is one step further than theologians like Aquinas have gone in their similar discussions. Using his work as a method by which to understand the apparently impossible act of transforming food to flesh provides a logical angle on a question of faith.

Keywords: aristotle, catholicism, eucharist, metaphysics transubstantiation

Procedia PDF Downloads 120

Authors: Beatriz Salamanca

Abstract:

In his public lecture ‘On the American Indians’ given at the University of Salamanca in 1538-39, Francisco de Vitoria presented an unsettling defense of freedom of movement, arguing that the Spanish had the right to travel and dwell in the New World, since it was considered part of the law of nations [ius gentium] that men enjoyed free mutual intercourse anywhere they went. The principle of freedom of movement brought hopeful expectations, promising to bring mankind together and strengthen the ties of fraternity. However, it led to polemical situations when those whose mobility was in question represented a harmful threat or was for some reason undesired. In this context, Vitoria’s argument has been seen on multiple occasions as a justification of the expansion of the Spanish empire. In order to examine the meaning of Vitoria’s defense of free mobility, a more detailed look at Vitoria’s text is required, together with the study of some of his earliest works, among them, his commentaries on Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologiae, where he presented relevant insights on the idea of the law of nations. In addition, it is necessary to place Vitoria’s work in the context of the intellectual tradition he belonged to and the responses he obtained from some of his contemporaries who were concerned with similar issues. The claim of this research is that the Spanish right to travel advocated by Vitoria was not intended to be interpreted in absolute terms, for it had to serve the purpose of bringing peace and unity among men, and could not contradict natural law. In addition, Vitoria explicitly observed that the right to travel was only valid if the Spaniards caused no harm, a condition that has been underestimated by his critics. Therefore, Vitoria’s legacy is of enormous value as it initiated a long lasting discussion regarding the question of the grounds under which human mobility could be restricted. Again, under Vitoria’s argument it was clear that this freedom was not absolute, but the controversial nature of his defense of Spanish mobility demonstrates how difficult it was and still is to address the issue of the circulation of peoples across frontiers, and shows the significance of this discussion in today’s globalized world, where the rights and wrongs of notions like immigration, international trade or foreign intervention still lack sufficient consensus. This inquiry about Vitoria’s defense of the principle of freedom of movement is being placed here against the background of the history of political thought, political theory, international law, and international relations, following the methodological framework of contextual history of the ‘Cambridge School’.

Keywords: Francisco de Vitoria, freedom of movement, law of nations, ius gentium, Spanish empire

Procedia PDF Downloads 330

Authors: Merina Islam

Abstract:

The feminists have identified the traditional western ethical theories as basically male centered. Feminists are committed to develop a critique showing how the traditional western ethics together with traditional philosophy, irrespective of the claim for gender neutrality, all throughout remained gender-biased. This exclusion of women’s experiences from the moral discourse is justified on the ground that women cannot be moral agents, since they are not rational. By way of entailment, we are thus led to the position that virtues of traditional ethics, so viewed, can nothing but rational and hence male. The ears of traditional Western ethicists have been attuned to male rather than female ethical voices. Right from the Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel and even philosophers like Freud, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and many others the dualism between reason-passion or mind and body started gaining prominence. These, according to them, have either intentionally excluded women or else have used certain male moral experience as the standard for all moral experiences, thereby resulting once again in exclusion of women’s experiences. Men are identified with rationality and hence contrasted with women whose sphere is believed to be that of emotion and feeling. This act of exclusion of women’s experience from moral discourse has given birth to a tradition that emphasizes reason over emotion, universal over the particular, and justice over caring. That patriarchy’s use of gender distinctions in the realm of Ethics has resulted in gender discriminations is an undeniable fact. Hence women’s moral agency is said to have often been denied, not simply by the act of exclusion of women from moral debate or sheer ignorance of their contributions, but through philosophical claims to the effect that women lack moral reason. Traditional or mainstream ethics cannot justify its claim for universality, objectivity and gender neutrality the standards from which were drawn the legitimacy of the various moral maxims or principles of it. Right from the Platonic and Aristotelian period the dualism between reason-passion or mind and body started gaining prominence. Men are identified with rationality and hence contrasted with women whose sphere is believed to be that of emotion and feeling. Through the Association of the masculine values with reason (the feminine with irrational), was created the standard prototype of moral virtues The feminists’ critique of the traditional mainstream Ethics is based on this charge that because of its inherent gender bias, in the name of gender distinctions, Ethics has so far been justifying discriminations. In this paper, attempt would make upon the gender biased-ness of traditional ethics. But Feminists are committed to develop a critique showing how the traditional ethics together with traditional philosophy, irrespective of the claim for gender neutrality, all throughout remained gender-biased. We would try to show to what extent traditional ethics is male centered and consequentially fails to justify its claims for universality and gender neutrality.

Keywords: ethics, gender, male-centered, traditional

Procedia PDF Downloads 388

Authors: Mark Wiebe

Abstract:

One of the tasks contemporary analytic philosophers have focused on (e.g., Wolterstorff, Alston, Plantinga, Hasker, and Crisp) is the analysis of certain medieval metaphysical frameworks. This growing body of scholarship has helped clarify and prevent distorted readings of medieval and ancient writers. However, as scholars like Dolezal, Duby, and Brower have pointed out, these analyses have been incomplete or inaccurate in some instances, e.g., with regard to analogical speech or the doctrine of divine simplicity (DDS). Additionally, contributors to this work frequently express opposing claims or fail to note substantial differences between ancient and medieval thinkers. This is the case regarding the comparison between Thomas Aquinas and others. Anton Pegis and Étienne Gilson have argued along this line that Thomas’ metaphysical framework represents a fundamental shift. Gilson describes Thomas’ metaphysics as a turn from a form of “essentialism” to “existentialism.” One should argue that this shift distinguishes Thomas from many Analytic philosophers as well as from other classical defenders of the DDS. Moreover, many of the objections Analytic Philosophers make against Thomas presume the same metaphysical principles undergirding the above-mentioned form of essentialism. This weakens their force against Thomas’ positions. In order to demonstrate these claims, it will be helpful to consider Thomas’ metaphysical outlook alongside that of two other prominent figures: Augustine and Ockham. One area of their thinking which brings their differences to the surface has to do with how each relates to Platonic and Neo-Platonic thought. More specifically, it is illuminating to consider whether and how each distinguishes or conceives essence and existence. It is also useful to see how each approaches the Platonic conflicts between essence and individuality, unity and intelligibility. In both of these areas, Thomas stands out from Augustine and Ockham. Although Augustine and Ockham diverge in many ways, both ultimately identify being with particularity and pit particularity against both unity and intelligibility. Contrastingly, Thomas argues that being is distinct from and prior to essence. Being (i.e., Being in itself) rather than essence or form must therefore serve as the ground and ultimate principle for the existence of everything in which being and essence are distinct. Additionally, since change, movement, and addition improve and give definition to finite being, multitude and distinction are, therefore, principles of being rather than non-being. Consequently, each creature imitates and participates in God’s perfect Being in its own way; the perfection of each genus exists pre-eminently in God without being at odds with God’s simplicity, God has knowledge, power, and will, and these and the many other terms assigned to God refer truly to the being of God without being either meaningless or synonymous. The existentialist outlook at work in these claims distinguishes Thomas in a noteworthy way from his contemporaries and predecessors as much as it does from many of the analytic philosophers who have objected to his thought. This suggests that at least these kinds of objections do not apply to Thomas’ thought.

Keywords: theology, philosophy of religion, metaphysics, philosophy

Procedia PDF Downloads 37