Francisco Suárez (1548-1617) was one of the most important philosophers and theologians of Early Modern Scholasticism. Although Suárez spent most of his academic career as a professor of theology, he is better known today for his Metaphysical Disputations (Salamanca, 1597). The present volume contains a facing-page English translation of Metaphysical Disputations III & IV. Metaphysical Disputation III offers a general treatment of the properties of being as such, while Metaphysical Disputation IV deals with one of these properties (...) in particular, transcendental unity. The Latin text contained in this volume introduces a significant number of corrections to the text of the Vivès edition, the one standardly used by scholars of Suárez, and thus more faithfully reproduces the text of the first edition. The volume also contains a lengthy introduction that provides a detailed survey of the disputations' principal claims and arguments. (shrink)

In der Fünften metaphysischen Disputation behandelt Suárez (1548–1617) die Definition der Individualität, das metaphysische Individuationsprinzip (Individualdifferenz) und das physische Individuationsprinzip der Substanzen und Akzidentien. Die Darlegung berücksichtigt einen großen Teil der damals maßgeblichen Literatur und gibt zugleich einen Eindruck von der Schulphysik des späten 16. Jahrhunderts.

In der Fünften metaphysischen Disputation behandelt Suárez (1548-1617) die Definition der Individualität, das metaphysische Individuationsprinzip (Individualdifferenz) und das physische Individuationsprinzip der Substanzen und Akzidentien. Die Darlegung berücksichtigt einen großen Teil der damals maßgeblichen Literatur und gibt zugleich einen Eindruck von der Schulphysik des späten 16. Jahrhunderts.

Œuvre de maturité de François Suarez (1548-1617), Des lois et du Dieu législateur a été publié en latin en 1612. Parmi les dix livres que comprend cet ouvrage, nous avons choisi de présenter pour la première fois les deux premiers en langue française. À partir de l'héritage retravaillé de la philosophie politique antique et médiévale, Suarez élabore une théorie originale de la loi et de la communauté en renouvelant leur rapport à l'éthique et à la jurisprudence. Dans une (...) période marquée notamment par la controverse de Valladolid (1550) et la Contre-Réforme, l'auteur redéfinit le contenu et la finalité des concepts fondamentaux de la théorie politique (l'état de nature, le droit naturel, le droit subjectif, la loi naturelle, le pacte social, la souveraineté, l'État et le droit des gens) en les articulant à une compréhension historique de l'homme conçu comme être libre, raisonnable et fini. Suarez instaure ainsi les conditions d'un basculement du théologico-politique dans la modernité dont les effets se feront sentir, entre autres, chez Grotius et l'École du droit naturel. Les conséquences de ce mouvement seront perceptibles jusqu'au XVIIIe siècle avec Wolf. Des lois et du Dieu législateur permet précisément d'apprécier à sa juste mesure la place privilégiée qu'il convient de redonner à la théorie suarézienne de la loi dans l'histoire de la pensée politique. (shrink)

Kremer zeigt am Beispiel zwischenstaatlicher Herrschaftsausübung, wie Suárez vom Begriff des gerechten Friedens her seine Theorie des politischen Handelns unter der Perspektive des Heils entfaltet.

Collective book dedicated to the philosophical thought of Francisco Suárez.

The debate on universals is, generally speaking, a well-known subject in the history of philosophy, but views on universals from the end of the sixteenth to the mid-seventeenth century—the object of Heider’s welcome contribution—are quite neglected. Such views are extremely sophisticated, drawing on the established traditions of Thomism and Scotism, in particular, but bringing them to a new level of technicality. Heider investigates three major positions: those of Francisco Suárez, João Poinsot, and the joint position of Bartolomeo Mastri and (...) Bonaventura Belluto. The three views are chosen to.. (shrink)

This study aims to present a comparative analysis of philosophical theories of universals espoused by the foremost representatives of the three main schools of early modern scholastic thought. The book introduces the doctrines of Francisco Suárez, S.J. (1548-1617), the Thomist John of St. Thomas, O.P. (1589-1644), and the Scotists Bartolomeo Mastri da Meldola, O.F.M. Conv. (1602-1673) and Bonaventura Belluto, O.F.M. Conv. (1600-1676). The author examines in detail their mutual doctrinal delineation as well as the conceptualist tenet of (...) the Jesuit Pedro Hurtado de Mendoza (1578-1641), whose thought constitutes an important systematic point of comparison especially with Suárez's doctrine. The book offers the first comparative elaboration of the issue of universals, in both its metaphysical and its epistemological aspects, in the era of second scholasticism. (shrink)

Francisco Suárez (1548-1617) publicou em 1597 sua obra-prima em metafísica, as Disputationes metaphysicae. Na trigésima terceira Disputa – o objeto deste artigo – Suárez defende primeiramente a substância sobtrês aspectos: como “ens per se” (uma entidade independente), como o que permanece no tempo, e como o suporte fundamental de acidentes. Secundariamente, ele utiliza três distinções com o objetivo de articular a noção de substância: substâncias completas e incompletas, substâncias perfeitas e imperfeitas, e a distinção entre substância primeira (...) e substância segunda. Uma gota d’água, por exemplo, é uma primeira substância completa, mas relativamente imperfeita. Em comparação com ela, a alma humana é uma primeira substância incompleta, mas mais perfeita. A regra é: quanto mais perfeita, tanto mais incompleta. Por trás dessas distinções, Suárez elabora um aspecto dinâmico da substância. A abordagem é aristotélica, sem incluir aspectos de filosofia social ou filosofia existencial. (shrink)

Este escrito surgió de la lectura del libro de M.ª Isabel Lafuente, Libertad, ley y poder. Bien común y Derechos humanos en la obra de Francisco Suárez (Editorial Académica Española, Berlín, 2022, 482 pp.), que se comenta a continuación. El foco de mi comentario en diálogo con este estudio es triple. Primeramente, señalar la importancia que la obra de Francisco Suárez (1548-1617) tuvo principalmente durante los siglos xvii-xviii y la variación de perspectiva y método que la (...) filosofía moderna introdujo con respecto al hacer de la escolástica y de la propia filosofía iusnaturalista de Suárez. En segundo lugar, indicar la recuperación y actualidad de Suárez en el presente. Y, en último lugar, ofrecer la estructura y los contenidos principales del libro de M.ª Isabel Lafuente con una breve conclusión. (shrink)

La idea de felicidad en Aristóteles está mediada por el sentido teleológico que otorga a la vida humana. La vida está orientada de un modo intrínseco e inherente hacia la eudaimonía, hacia la vida buena. Este es, grosso modo, el fundamento de la ética aristotélica. En este trabajo se pretenden confrontar las respuestas, en tanto que interpretaciones, de la idea de felicidad que han obtenido dos autores que apoyan sus respectivas teorías éticas en los planteamientos aristotélicos de felicidad. Sin embargo, (...) las respuestas son bien distintas, y dependen de los presupuestos metafísicos de ambos autores. Mientras Francisco Suárez (1548-1617) desde la comprensión del ser humano como un ser en relación, la idea de vida buena le lleva a desarrollar lo que algunos han denominado un “antropocentrismo crítico” de clara inspiración ignaciana, en la que nunca pierde de vista el valor de lo social como fuente primera para la caracterización de lo humano ni el sentido trascendente del fin último de la vida humana; Martha Nussbaum (1947) se servirá de una interpretación ilustrada, que inspirará el pensamiento liberal posterior, para justificar la radical diferenciación del yo como paso ineludible para el reconocimiento de aquello que nos hace humanos, aquello que denomina “capacidades centrales”. Los cuatrocientos años que median entre ambas propuestas nos parecen más que una medida de inconmensurabilidad, una oportunidad para sustentar la crítica denominada “individualismo metodológico”, una de las más controvertidas que ha recibido el denominado Enfoque de las Capacidades Humanas, desarrollado entre otros por la propia Nussbaum junto a Amartya Sen a partir de los años 1980. (shrink)

El objetivo del presente estudio es analizar algunos aspectos vinculados a la interpretación de la ley humana y su causa final en el pensamiento del teólogo, f ilósofo y jurista Español Francisco Suárez (1548-1617). En algunos autores resulta indudable su pertenencia a un modo de pensar determinado. Ello se observa, por mencionar algunos ejemplos, en los casos de Alberto Magno y Tomás de Aquino —identiicados con la edad media—. Por el contrario otros autores, aún medievales, desarrollaron doctrinas (...) que se constituyeron en preludio de elaboraciones posteriores modernas. Por este motivo tales figuras resultan fuertemente vinculadas a al- gunas corrientes de pensamiento modernas. Aquí puede mencionarse a Escoto, Ockham y Marsilio de Padua. Esta claridad recientemente señalada no se observa en relación a Francisco Suárez quien aparece como un autor controvertido y considerado de transición, por lo menos temporalmente, entre edad media y moderna. Las discusiones actuales en torno a Suárez se deben a la inexistencia de un cierto consenso respecto al lugar que le corresponde a su doctrina, especialmente filosófico-política, entre las concepciones que caracterizan a los períodos antiguo-medieval y moderno. Por estos motivos esta investigación persigue def inir la ubicación del pensamiento suareciano, en relación al tema propuesto, y de acuerdo a lo que nuestro autor expone en su Tratado de la Ley. (shrink)

The nature and essence of democracy is a bigger issue today than it has been for a long time. With (clearly and allegedly) populist movements in Western Europe and the US, the question of what constitutes democracy has become a contentious issue, though often treated only implicitly. In this article, the nature and essence of democracy is treated with Francisco Suárez (1548-1617) as a guide. This is done on the background of his general metaphysics. It is concluded (...) that Suárez's political philosophy can be called democratic, as political power comes from and ultimately rests with “the people”, according to him. The right balance between “people”, in the plural, and “the people”, in the singular, cannot be calculated, though. On the background of the treatment of Suárez's political philosophy, some conclusions regarding how best to uphold and strengthen democracy are drawn. (shrink)

Une étude de l’apport de l’œuvre de Francisco Suarez (1548-1617) à la métaphysique. Rééxaminant notamment les Disputationes metaphysicae (1597), Jean-François Courtine définit le « moment Suarez » dans l’histoire de la métaphysique et son impact sur la philosophie moderne.

In the last several years, there has been an uptick of scholarly interest in Aristotelian theories of efficient causation. Much of this interest has focused on the late scholastic figure Francisco Suárez (1548-1617). This paper clarifies an important but neglected aspect of Suárez's theory of efficient causation—namely, his account of active causal powers. Like other Aristotelians, Suárez understands active causal powers as features that enable their subjects to perform certain sorts of actions. For example, a fire is (...) able to heat in virtue of its power or capacity for heating. However, it is not immediately clear which items in an Aristotelian ontology perform the role of an active power. The paper explains and motivates Suárez's answer to this question, and shows how this answer influences his position in a scholastic controversy about the causal roles of substantial and accidental forms in substantial change. (shrink)

For Christian theology, the survival of the soul after the death of the body is a matter of fact. However, its philosophical explanation is probably the most peculiar issue of Thomas Aquinas’ radically Aristotelianaccount of body-soul. For both Augustine and Avicenna – who, together with Aristotle, can be considered the main sources of thirteenth century philosophy – the certainty of the immaterial soul’s ability to survive independently from the body was so strong that, coining their very own notions of human (...) spiritual substance, they described it as only partially implied in the act of the body’s information. This account was able to mediate between Aristotle’s idea of the soul as a form of the body and the Neoplatonic theory of the soul as an independent substance.... (shrink)

In this paper I focus on the historiographical fate of Francisco Suárez (1548–1617) and Pedro da Fonseca (1528–1599) in two Iberian journals ran by Jesuits and founded in 1945: the Spanish Pensamiento, and the Portuguese Revista portuguesa de filosofia. I endeavor to show that the discussions of Suárez’s and Fonseca’s ideas on these journal is a two-sided case of constructing the legacies of major figures in late scholasticism, and I emphasize how the demand to identify cultural national (...) heroes intertwines with theoretical and ideological elements, especially the peculiar history of the Iberian Peninsula, and to the historical relationships between Spain and Portugal. With regard to Suárez, the Pensamiento group strives to carve out a specific place for Neo-Suarezianism within Neo-Thomism, also via a substantive reassessment of Suárez’s importance in the history of scholasticism and of philosophy in general. Hence, Suárez’s thought undergoes triumphant reevaluation, which even aims at ousting Aquinas as the ultimate reference of scholasticism, to make Suárez’s Thomism the principal authority of contemporary schools. By contrast, Fonseca remains a rather obscure and neglected figure, dug up by his fellow compatriots on the Revista portuguesa de filosofia, also against this attempt at establishing a Suarezian, Spanish hegemony. (shrink)

Francisco Suárez (1548–1617) sieht es als Problem an, dass nach dem traditionellen Modell der Kunstproduktion der Gedanke immer nur als Vorkonzeption und damit auf sehr vermittelte Weise in das Kunstwerk eingeht.

Cuatro siglos después de la primera edición de las Disputationes Metaphysicae (1597), esa voluminosa obra sigue siendo la mayor aportación de la filosofía española. Francisco Suárez (1548-1617) es el autor de una de las grandes síntesis del pensamiento escolástico. La clave de su pensamiento y de las "Disputationes" se encuentra en la idea de causalidad o acción libre. Desde esta clave se formulan brevemente algunos tópicos: acto y potencia, causalidad, creación. El autor muestra la Metafísica de Suárez (...) desde una óptica existencial y rechaza las acusaciones de abstractismo. (shrink)

The goal of this article is to suggest that in early modern discussions of agency and causal efficacy it is possible to detect an attempt at pushing to its extreme consequences a specific account of agency and causality that was developed in late scholastic thought. More specifically, the article examines Francisco Suárez's (1548–1617) account of freedom and how this relates to his views on efficient causality. Despite Suárez's careful way of differentiating between natural (necessary) and human (free) (...) agents, his view can be exploited to drive home occasionalist positions that deny causal efficacy for natural agents lacking reason. The family resemblance that might be noted between early modern positions could be traced back to the reception of a common late scholastic background and to the tensions and potential nestled there. (shrink)

Until recently Francisco Suárez (1548–1617) has been regarded as the “last medieval philosopher,” representing the end of the philosophically respectful scholastic tradition going back to the Early Middle Ages. In fact, however, Suárez stood at the beginning, rather than at the end, of a distinguished scholastic culture, which should best be labeled “Baroque scholasticism,” and which flourished throughout the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. In this paper I offer some ideas on why the study of this philosophical (...) culture has been so far neglected by the mainstream Anglo-American philosophical historiography and argue that more attention should be paid to it. (shrink)

Francisco Suarez (1548-1617) jesuite, juriste et theologien espagnol est un representant emblematique de la seconde scolastique. Sa reflexion se deploie dans le cadre bouillonnant de l'Universite de Salamanque qui voit la theologie se renover profondement. Considere comme un des plus grands theoriciens des questions juridiques et politiques, son maitre ouvrage, le De Legibus, a marque une etape essentielle de la reflexion anthropologique sur la nature politique de l'individu, mais est surtout remarquable pour le role qu'il a joue (...) dans le long processus de reflexion et de modernisation de la conception antique du pouvoir politique. Les reflexions et orientations qu'il propose sont, pour un certain nombre, a l'origine des outils et conceptions modernes de la politique en general et de la loi en particulier. Jean-Paul Coujou est professeur a la faculte de philosophie de l'Institut catholique de Toulouse et membre de l'Institut Michel Villey. Il est l'auteur d'une vingtaine d'ouvrages dont en 2012, Pensee de l'etre et theorie politique. Le moment suarezien, en trois volumes, aux editions Peeters a Louvain. (shrink)

The problem of non-being and intentionality has been among the topic subjects of Western philosophers from Parmenides to Quine. In medieval and post-medieval scholastics the issue was articulated mainly as ens rationis (a being of reason). The paper deals with the character and division of beings of reason in Francisco Suarez (1548-1617). An immanent critique of Suarez's theory is given as well. The paper offers also a brief outline of the history of its later reception by Baroque (...) authors. (shrink)

Clemente de Munguía (1810-1868) fue un f ilósofo del derecho mexicano. Su pensamiento fue iusnaturalista de corte historicista y escolástico, con influencia suareciana. Su visión sobre el derecho lo convierte en un neoescolástico adelantado cuyo pensamiento engrandece la f igura de Francisco Suárez (1548-1617). El conocimiento de su f igura y de su obra resulta tanto más interesante por el momento histórico en que se produce, que en el ámbito mexicano coincide con la independencia del país; y (...) en el euro americano con la expansión de los positivismos jurídicos. Pese a ello, el pensamiento munguiano muestra la pervivencia de la obra de Francisco Suárez, como uno de los grandes pensadores jurídicos del mundo hispano. (shrink)

In this paper the author examines certain ideas of the Spanish School of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries which directly inspired the School of Hugo Grotius in the seventeenth, thus opening the way towards possible declarations of human rights such as that of United Nations. The line of thought which extends from Francisco de Vitoria (1492/93–1546) to Francisco Suárez (1548–1617) is given the name of the “Spanish natural law and law of nations School.”.

In this paper I deal with the issues in Second Scholasticism of the nature, genesis and creatability of perfect vital acts of cognition and appetition in vital powers. I present the theories of Francisco Suárez (1548–1617), Raffaele Aversa (1589–1657), and Bartolomeo Mastri (1602–1673) together with Bonaventura Belluto (1603–1676). I show that while for Aversa these acts are action-like items merely emanating from the soul and vital powers and as such cannot be produced from the outside, even by (...) God, for Mastri and Belluto they are absolute qualities proceeding from their principles by efficient causation proper, which is a kind of procession that can be replaced by God. I argue that Suárez’s position attempts to steer a middle ground between these two theories. (shrink)

Abstract -/- Before Descartes, middle age philosophers like Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), Duns Scotus (1266-1308), and Francisco Suarez (1548-1617) used to discuss the distinction between essence and existence in three ways (of course, Ibn-Sina was the first who made this distinction to rehabilitate Aristotelian philosophy in the Islamic heritage). Descartes was aware of that, but discussed it according to the relation between mind and body. Yet, he told us many times that he was used to separate essence from (...) existence in metaphysical issues. The objective of this paper is first to rephrase his untold opinion about the relation between essence and existence on the basis of his conception of the problem of distinction according to mind and body, and second, to disclose that Descartes's conception of existence is twofold. At the end, it is claimed that his twofold notion of existence and his inability to overcome it, is the principal factor in his failure to explicate everything according to first principles, and so in his failure to defeat skepticism. (shrink)