Die Bestimmung des byzantinischen Gottesdenkens als «System» ist immer ein scandalum gewesen. Es wird als solches eher von seinen Kritikern begriffen, während seine Fürsprecher diese Bezeichnung überwiegend ablehnen. Wenn die byzantinischen Autoren in das Zentrum der Gotteserkenntnis eine Erfahrung oder eine Praxis stellen, die als Quelle der Theologie und als «wahre Philosophie» betrachtet werden, so ist zu erwarten, daß sie, Erfahrung oder Praxis, in systematischen Schriften selten und unwillig besprochen werden. Vielmehr begründen die meisten Autoren das Erscheinen ihrer Texte mit (...) dem Widerstand gegen gewisse Irrlehren. Diese Motivation bestimmt den hauptsächlich polemischen Charakter der Schriften und erklärt auch den Mangel eines explizierten philosophischen oder theologischen Systems im scholastischen Sinn. Das besagt aber nicht, daß die byzantinische Denkweise kein immanentes System und keine eigene Strukturen besitzt. Die Grundelemente dieser Systematik sind der Gegenstand der vorliegenden Überlegung. (shrink)

This book offers an interpretation of the unum argumentum . Interpreted as a search for the limit of thought, the argument cannot be understood as an "ontological proof". Afterwards, the author shows which Anselm has been misperceived by subsequent interpreters.

The question concerning the view of Hugo Etherianus is placed here in a broader context of the processes that shaped and reshaped the Byzantine culture model between the 11th and the 12th century. The newly formed culture determined the cultural situation after the fall of Constantinople in 1204 and remained valid until the end of the Byzantine period. Characterizing the Byzantines relation to the West was the key component of this model. During various theological and philosophical debates between Latin and (...) Romaic thinkers in the 12th century in Byzantium, the nearly 20-year career of Hugo Etherianus occupied a prominent position in Constantinople. Hugo was the best Latin expert on Hellenic and Byzantine philosophy and theology in the 12th century, particularly associated with the new dialecticians. His writings and letters as well as his debates with various Byzantine philosophers and theologians are an important testimony on the parting of the Byzantine and the Latin intellectual traditions during the last quarter of the 12th century. (shrink)

“The Aristotelian corpus and Christian Philosophy in Byzantium between the Ninth and Fifteenth Centuries: Readings and Traditions” is the topic of Section I of SIEPM Commission VIII: Byzantine Philosophy. Aristotle’s writings, which were assimilated variously, function as a meta-text of medieval intellectual culture. Between the nineth and fifteenth centuries Byzantine thinkers developed stable and functional strategies for integrating Aristotle’s philosophical methodology into different theological and philosophical contexts. The project will study the influence of Aristotle on Byzantine metaphysics, epistemology, physics and (...) ethics. We shall attempt to reconstruct the Aristotelian roots of key conceptual models in Byzantine philosophy that played a major role in theological discussion and exposition, such as the metaphysical status of hypostasis, the paradigm of essence-energy, the use of the categories for developing the concept of the image, the transformation of Aristotle’s concept of the soul in lig... (shrink)

Bulletin de Philosophie Médiévale, Volume 62, Issue, Page 367-376, January 2020.

Bulletin de Philosophie Médiévale, Volume 62, Issue, Page 367-376, January 2020.