Nicholas of Autrecourt maintains in his second letter to Bernard of Arezzo that with the exception of the certitude of faith, there is no other certitude but the certitude of the law of non-contradiction, or the one that can be resolved to this law. The article examines this statement, which implies that natural theology is not possible. It comes to the conclusion that, in general, Nicholas in his letter seems to identify the relation "…can be resolved…" between two certain sentences (...) with the relation "…follows from…". This identification leads to problems which are discussed. Further, Nicholas says that in every valid inference the consequent is identical with the antecedent or is part of it. This can be understood in two ways. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:I would like to begin by thanking Gregory LaNave for his analysis of Bonaventure's Itinerarium. His interpretation has helped me clarify my own understanding of that rich text. I would also like to thank the editors of Franciscan Studies who invited this response. It focuses on LaNave's misreading of "symbolic theology," his own "scientific" interpretation of the Itinerarium, and the relationship between scientific and symbolic theology as explained by (...) Bonaventure. Accordingly, I divide my response into three parts: Clarifying the Meaning of Symbolic Theology, Critique of Dr. LaNave's Analysis, and Scientific and Symbolic Theology.Clarifying the Meaning of Symbolic TheologyIn Divine and Created Order in Bonaventure's Theology, I employ the term "symbolic theology" to help the modern reader approach and appreciate Bonaventure's profuse use of symbols in the Itinerarium. Dr. LaNave acknowledges that such an accommodation is valuable: "The symbolic reading of Bonaventure has undoubted merits, not least of which is its attempts to do justice to his deft use of an array of symbols in his theology."In my "attempts to do justice" to the ubiquitous symbols throughout the Itinerarium, I describe "symbolic theology" in two ways. First, I claim that Bonaventure:does not employ symbols to prove anything, rather, he resorts to the effusive nature of symbols to demonstrate ineffable mysteries that elude easy description … symbolic thinking, in its most authentic form, is not a second-best mode of grasping reality but a penetration of its most profound metaphysical structure and dynamics.LaNave seems to have two concerns. On the one hand, since symbols do not "prove anything" he deems them as rather inadequate in describing metaphysical realities. For LaNave, symbols can not be "merely symbolic" if "they are in fact ways to penetrate the real metaphysical structure of the realities in question." The "merely" points to the need for something more, which LaNave identifies as the "objectivity of sensation" according to the "canons of a scientific theology ," In effect, he emphasizes by a threefold repetition that the "objectivity of sensation" can better examine "what is really there." It seems that symbols are less equipped for such a task.On the other hand, LaNave's contrast of "symbolic" with "scientific" seems to confuse what I identified as a general characteristic for the actual methodology I employed to analyze the Itinerarium: an analysis of the analogical triads produced by the threefold method of doubling. Like LaNave, I base my interpretation upon the dialectic of seeing God through and in a mirror . Hence, I disagree that I employ a "symbolic approach to theology." Rather, my approach primarily examines the text's analogical triads.Second, I also comment, "Bonaventure uses symbols to provide the imagination with powerful images with which one may ponder the deepest and highest levels of knowing." As an example, I provide the two symbols of the Seraph and Temple from Isaiah 6:1-2. However, LaNave does not comment on this second description of Bonaventure's "symbolic theology." Instead he states:the mystery revealed in any such symbol points to the whole of the mystery, never to any one part in isolation. For example, one may speak about creation and its relationship to the single creative activity of the Creator; but one must at the same time know that Creator to be the Trinity, and see the analogous presence of the Trinity in the creature. Analytical thinking might try to separate these elements; symbolic thinking always strives to see them implied in each other.To justify his claim, he cites pages 228-29 of Divine and Created Order.These pages do not treat or even mention "symbolic theology." Rather, they explain the terms principium, primum, and primitas, and their relation to the notion of ordo. These three terms concern foundational concepts that shape the ontology, metaphysics, and epistemology of Bonaventure's theology. In effect, LaNave correctly.. (shrink)

“Principium Sapientiae. Los orígenes del pensamiento filosófico griego” fue publicado póstumamente en 1952 y estaba prácticamente acabado, a salvo de algunos aspectos de los capítulos finales, cuando a Cornford le sobrevino la muerte. La edición ha sido preparada por W. K. C. Guthrie, que ha añadido una breve introducción y un apéndice. “Principium Sapientiae” ofrece una perspectiva general sobre el pensamiento de su autor a la vez que añade material nuevo a los trabajos anteriores. Hoy es ya una (...) obra clásica. (shrink)

Ens Primum Cognitum in Thomas Aquinas and the Tradition presents a reading of Thomas Aquinas' claim that "being" is the first object of the human intellect. Blending the insights of both the early Thomistic tradition (c.1380--1637AD) and the Leonine Thomistic revival (1879--present), Brian Kemple examines how this claim of Aquinas has been traditionally understood, and what is lacking in that understanding. While the recent tradition has emphasized the primacy of the real (so-called ens reale) in human recognition of the (...) primum cognitum, Kemple argues that this misinterprets Aquinas, thereby closing off Thomistic philosophy to the broader perspective needed to face the philosophical challenges of today, and proposes an alternative interpretation with dramatic epistemological and metaphysical consequences. (shrink)

Many medical students are fearful of voicing their concerns about ethically troubling medical practice. Yet they must speak up if they are to meet their responsibilities to patients, colleagues, and the profession of medicine.

Name der Zeitschrift: Frühmittelalterliche Studien Jahrgang: 47 Heft: 1 Seiten: 185-208.

ZusammenfassungDer traumatische Wiederholungszwang ist kein primum movens, sondern eine reaktive dialektische Bewegung. Sie hat zwar die Menschheitsgeschichte eröffnet; aber deren Verlauf lässt sich aus ihr nicht deduzieren. Hösles Verdacht, dass meine Philosophie des Traums genau dies versucht, entspringt seiner Neigung, meine dialektische Konzeption dualistisch zu lesen. Während mir eine Fundierung negativer Dialektik von der Psychoanalyse aus vorschwebt, bleibt er bei der positiven Dialektik des objektiven Idealismus. Daraus ergeben sich auch unterschiedliche Vorstellungen über die Leistungsfähigkeit der Mentalarchäologie, die ich betreibe.

In this essay, we focus on the moral justification of a highly controversial measure to redress medical brain drain: the duty to stay. We argue that the moral justification for this duty lies primarily in the fact that medical students impose high risks on their fellow citizens while receiving their medical training, which in turn gives them a reciprocity-based reason to temporarily prioritize the medical needs of their fellow citizens.

This paper seeks to defuse two claims. On the one hand, I confront the Hildebrandian claim that Thomism, by placing the principium of love in the needs and desires of the lover rather than in the beloved, denies the possibility of transcendent love; on the other, I seek to refute the Thomistic objection that Hildebrand lacks a sufficient understanding of nature and its inherent teleology. In order to accomplish this, a distinction must be made between different kinds of (...) class='Hi'>principium or “for-its-own-sakeness.” Using St. Thomas’ theory of friendship-love, I show how every affective movement in fact has two fundamentally different principia: an “end-desired,” and an “end-for-whom” the former is desired. I next note that “value” and “bonum honestum” each encompass both of these types of “worthiness,” and that the failure to distinguish between these two has led to much of the misunderstanding between Thomists and Hildebrandians: for while the latter sometimes seem to include inanimate objects like sunsets under the higher “worthiness” (as “ends-for-whom”), the former often tend to classify even the beloved under the lower “worthiness” (as a mere “end-desired”), which are both untenable positions. It is shown, however, that for St. Thomas it is the higher, more ultimate sense of “worthiness” that is the foundation of friendship-love, and that thus love remains a truly “transcendent” or “ecstatic” phenomenon. Two objections are then addressed: 1) St. Thomas’ claim that substantial unity is the greatest cause of love, and 2) his claim that man’s primary end is Vision. In both these respects I argue that Aquinas’ position needs correction; still I maintain that neither claim should be taken to imply that, for Aquinas, man is his own center, his own chief “end-for-whom.” Finally, while Hildebrand emphatically denies that natural teleology can explain man’s transcendence (a Thomistic position), this denial seems to flow simply from confusing two ways in which “nature” can be invoked as an explanation: where he sees it invoked as the final cause, Thomists actually invoke it as simply the formal cause of our love for our true Final Cause. (shrink)

Während seiner langjährigen Tätigkeit als Facharzt für Psychiatrie am Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust hat der Autor dieses Beitrags die Entwicklung der Gesundheitsfürsorge von Kindern mit Geschlechtsidentitätsstörung (»gender dysphoria«) aus nächster Nähe beobachtet. Der Beitrag entwickelt einige Hypothesen zu den soziokulturellen Faktoren für den plötzlichen, sprunghaften Anstieg der Zahl minderjähriger Patienten, bei denen Geschlechtsidentitätsstörungen diagnostiziert und die dann zur medikamentösen und operativen Geschlechtsumwandlung an spezialisierte Zentren überwiesen wurden, und schildert charakteristische Denkverbote in diesem Zusammenhang. Die beruflichen Bedingungen, die seinen (...) Text beeinflussten, und die weiteren Entwicklungen in der Tavistock-Klinik wie auch in seinem eigenen Leben erläutert der Autor schließlich in einem nachstehenden Kommentar zu seinem eigenen Text. (shrink)

advanced directivesend-of-life decisionsharming the deadposthumous reproductiontransplant ethics.

The article investigates the language of the faith of the Church on the mystery of God. It analyzes its origin and typology, its specificity and ecclesial meaning, its ecumenical relevance, its logical coherence and its theological actuality. It follows the definitions and declarations of the Magisterium while placing the doctrine within the bi-millennial history of Trinitarian theology. The study underlines the importance for the unity of the Church of the formulation of the faith which in adoring the inseparable Trinity proclaims (...) the Holy Monarchy - origin of the divine life and of the sacramental economy - of the eternal, unbegotten Father, principle of the whole deity. After having followed the efforts made by the first apologists to sketch out the language of the ineffable mystery, and the various models of trinitarian language, the study exposes the language used by the councils in East and West: Nicea I and II, Constantinople I to III, Lateran I to IV, Lyons II to Florence, Vatican I to II, so as better to formulate the principles which articulate the rule of faith of the Church. The logic of the ecclesial language is resumed in propositions concerned with the main affirmations of faith and the proclamation of the mystery. The first propositions treat the knowability of the mystery, the possibility of its verification and the dialectic of its language. The main propositions refer to the three divine hypostases, Father, Son and Spirit, in the economy of salvation and in. (shrink)

Cayetano tuvo un papel protagónico en los debates intelectuales de su época (s. XVI), destacándose como un auténtico adalid del tomismo; inclusive muchas de sus tesis pasaron a formar parte de tal doctrina, las cuales –a veces matizadas y otras no tanto– perviven hasta nuestros días. Entre los diversos temas que afrontó se destaca su particular noción de primum cognitum. Aquí, partimos del hecho de que la tradición tomista no ha visto mayores inconvenientes en equiparar lo que entienden Cayetano (...) y el Aquinate por el ens primo cadit; empero nosotros estamos en condiciones de afirmar que tal equiparación al menos es problemática. En este sentido, nos ocuparemos de realizar un primer acercamiento al tema del ente primer conocido cayetaniano para intentar mostrar su real significado. Asimismo, procuraremos ver, ayudados por los aportes de algunos estudiosos contemporáneos –en especial el de Lawrence Dewan–, hasta qué punto tal noción se corresponde o no con los desarrollos teóricos de Tomás de Aquino, sobre todo con el vínculo entre el primer conocido y el ente como objeto de la metafísica. (shrink)

Several recent anti-obesity campaigns appear to embrace stigmatization of obese individuals as a public health strategy. These approaches seem to be based on the fundamental assumptions that (1) obesity is largely under an individual’s control and (2) stigmatizing obese individuals will motivate them to change their behavior and will also result in successful behavior change. The empirical evidence does not support these assumptions: Although body weight is, to some degree, under individuals’ personal control, there are a range of biopsychosocial barriers (...) that make weight regulation difficult. Furthermore, there is accumulating evidence that stigmatizing obese individuals decreases their motivation to diet, exercise, and lose weight. Public health campaigns should focus on facilitating behavioral change, rather than stigmatizing obese people, and should be grounded in the available empirical evidence. Fundamentally, these campaigns should, first, do no harm. (shrink)

This research note identifies for the first time the principium on book I of the Sentences by the prolific polymath Henry of Langenstein. This discovery, when combined with the four principia of the Augustinian Denis of Modena, provides the evidence necessary to demonstrate that Langenstein lectured on the Sentences at Paris in 1371-1372. The note also establishes the identity of the other eight bachelors of theology who participated in the principial debates that year.