This paper reconstructs the teaching of James of Viterbo on the ontological status of the possibles, and compares his position with those of Henry of Ghent and Godfrey of Fontaines. James holds that possibles are real only in a qualified sense, as objects of God’s power and knowledge. While James appears to have been influenced by Henry in his explanation of divine knowledge of creatures, in his analysis of the possibles he makes no use of Henry’s theory of esse essentiae, (...) and he denies Henry’s claim that divine ideas function as exemplar causes of the possibiles. James’ theory is actually much closer to that of Godfrey, although Godfrey himself was highly critical of James’ teaching. (shrink)

This article examines James of Viterbo’s theory of seminal reasons as inchoate forms. James intends this theory to explain how the eduction of substantial forms from the potency of matter does not entail that such forms are created ex nihilo. Substantial forms that come to be in generation preexist in matter as forms in potency. The form in potency is an inchoation of, or aptitude or propensity for, the form that comes to be in act. Generation is thus understood by (...) James to be a modal change, for the form in potency and the form in act are one and the same thing ; they differ only with regard to their mode of being. James’s theory of inchoate forms is a development of Bonaventure’s theory of seminal reasons, but reformulated with the help of Simplicius and Averroes. (shrink)

Thomas Aquinas holds that the existence of God is self-evident in itself (because God’s essence is his existence) but not to us (since we do not know the divine essence). Giles of Rome agrees with the first part of Thomas’s claim, but he parts company with Aquinas by maintaining that God’s existence is self-evident to the wise. Since the wise can know that God is his existence, they cannot think of him as not existing. This paper reexamines Thomas’s teaching in (...) the light of Giles’s criticisms. By examining closely what is involved in the claim that God’s essence is his existence, and how one’s knowledge of this claim is related to the knowledge that God exists, it argues that Thomas’s position has the resources to withstand Giles’s objections. (shrink)

Metaphysics is enjoying an increasing popularity among contemporary analytic philosophers. A fine contribution to this literature is E. J. Lowe’s The Possibility of Metaphysics. Lowe’s title calls to mind the critical philosophy of Immanuel Kant. Rejecting the claim of traditional metaphysics to extend our knowledge of reality, Kant argued that metaphysics’ role is merely to provide an elaboration of the conceptual scheme used by the mind to represent objects. While not purporting to be an answer to Kant, Lowe’s book clearly (...) develops a non-Kantian metaphysics. He argues that the task of metaphysics is to tell us not what there is, but what there could be. By exploring the realm of metaphysical possibility, Lowe hopes to restore metaphysics to “a central position in philosophy as the most fundamental form of rational inquiry, with its own distinctive methods and criteria of validation”. (shrink)

William of Ockham is commonly regarded as one of the most important philosophers in the later medieval period. Recent years have witnessed a growing interest in Ockham’s thought, especially among analytically trained philosophers. This of course is not surprising, given the prominence of logical and semantic concerns in Ockham’s philosophy. For those wishing a philosophically rigorous introduction to Ockham’s thought this recent addition to the Cambridge Companion series should serve as a useful reference tool. The editor, Paul Spade, has brought (...) together an excellent group of scholars, who provide extensive and highly sophisticated analyses of Ockham’s thought. The book promises to offer “a full discussion of all significant aspects of Ockham’s thought: logic, philosophy of language, metaphysics and natural philosophy, epistemology, ethics, action theory, political thought, and theology”. Although such a claim might invite some skepticism, the book’s fifteen chapters do indeed discuss a wide range of topics. Three chapters discuss Ockham’s logic; two chapters are devoted to his metaphysics; an overview of his philosophy of nature is given in one chapter ; and his epistemology is treated in two chapters. Three chapters address ethical themes; one chapter discusses Ockham’s political writings; and two chapters address theological concerns in Ockham. The book’s opening chapter describes the historical setting in which Ockham worked. (shrink)