The nature of the human being in general and the existence and nature of the soul in particular has been discussed throughout the history of thought. As a knowing subject, man firstly tried to know himself. While making this questioning, he not only wondered about his phenomenal existence (body), but also about his spiritual identity, which he did not doubt was out there somewhere. This curiosity has created an ongoing scientific journey from anatomy to physiology, from science to philosophy, from (...) medicine to sociology, from biology to neurobiology, from psychology to neuropsychology, from chemistry to neurochemistry. In the end, various human conceptions have been developed in accordance with the scientific and philosophical background of each civilization. The ancient tradition of thought, which is the common accumulation of humanity, has largely included man in a dualist definition. Along with modern science, many devices have been developed to study human beings physically. Numerous data have been reached with the opportunities provided by technology, and these data have provided great usefulness in understanding what aspects a human being has in terms of physics and metaphysics. However, with the increase in our knowledge of the natural world and human, which is a part of it, the perspectives of the period were forced into paradigmatic changes. The philosophical movements that developed and changed in parallel with scientific knowledge, the decline of religion, especially in the Western world, regressed the dominant models in the interpretation of knowledge. Notions of human have inevitably taken their share from this great change. Is the subject behind the actions separate/independent from the body/brain and completely autonomous and rational? Or is it just the body/brain or its functionality, as modern neuroscience suggests? Does this coherent functionality arise entirely or in part from natural causation? Is there an essence or a distinctive feature that makes us human? If so, is this essence/property physical or is it a metaphysical substance? What answers did the early theologians give to these questions? What are the points of overlap between the hypotheses developed mainly on religious knowledge, partly on medical knowledge of the period via largely logical reasoning, and the definitions of human and soul revealed by contemporary experimental science? This line forms the main frame of the article. In summary, this study; It aims to identify the parallels and similarities of approach between the spiritual theories of the early theologians and current scientific data, which we see as two important phases of the ongoing ancient investigation. It is thought that the theories developed in this first period, when the transformation due to the acculturation process is not sufficiently determinative on thought, are more original and valuable. After giving brief information about the definitions of soul, mind, self and consciousness, which are among the basic concepts of the problem, the thoughts of early Mu‘tazilī and Ahl al-Sunnah thinkers on the subject are presented comparatively with current scientific data. We tried to make a healthy descriptive inference by making analytical and semantic arguments on the data obtained during the research. (shrink)

The third volume of Bucer's _Correspondance_ covers the years from 1527 to 1529. In this period the reformer played an increasing part in Strasbourg, while his renown started growing abroad. In Strasbourg he was put in charge of the St. Thomas parish, located closer to the city center. Along with his colleagues he appealed relentlessly to the City Council for a stricter moral discipline, for struggle against anabaptism and celebration of the mass, which was suspended on February 20, 1529. Moreover (...) he engaged in great activity in publishing five important biblical commentaries. Outside Strasbourg he intensified his evangelical propaganda in countries speaking romanic languages. His active involvement in the Berne disputation in January 1528 helped him make contact with the European Reformation. In the disastrous sacramentary strife he continued taking part in advocating concord between the protestant theologians. That is why he joined Philip von Hessen in setting up the Marburg colloquium. Faced with whose partial failure, he did his best to encourage Zwingli's project of a defensive alliance among evangelical cities in Switzerland and in the South-West of Germany, called the “Burgrecht”. (shrink)

Unlike most theologians of his age, Martin Bucer proved to be farsighted with respect to European affairs: In addition to his contacts within Alsace and Germany he established relations with almost every European country. It was his ecumenical attitude that always led him to mediate between the parties in the religious battles of his time. His deep commitment to the goal of reaching agreement can be traced in all his activities, works and letters. Since the first editor, Jean Rott, (...) died in 1998, Bucer's correspondence has been edited in Erlangen. This academic edition of source material provides future research with a broad basis for significant aspects of Reformation history about which very little is known. Volume VI covers the period from May to October 1531. (shrink)

Unlike most theologians of his age, Martin Bucer proved to be farsighted with respect to European affairs: In addition to his contacts within Alsace and Germany he established relations with almost every European country. It was his ecumenical attitude that always led him to mediate between the parties in the religious battles of his time. His deep commitment to the goal of reaching agreement can be traced in all his activities, works and letters. Since the first editor, Jean Rott, (...) died in 1998, Bucer's correspondence has been edited in Erlangen. This academic edition of source material provides future research with a broad basis for significant aspects of Reformation history about which very little is known. Volume VII covers the period from October 1531 to March 1532. (shrink)

The third volume of Bucer's _Correspondance_ covers the years from 1527 to 1529. In this period the reformer played an increasing part in Strasbourg, while his renown started growing abroad. In Strasbourg he was put in charge of the St. Thomas parish, located closer to the city center. Along with his colleagues he appealed relentlessly to the City Council for a stricter moral discipline, for struggle against anabaptism and celebration of the mass, which was suspended on February 20, 1529. Moreover (...) he engaged in great activity in publishing five important biblical commentaries. Outside Strasbourg he intensified his evangelical propaganda in countries speaking romanic languages. His active involvement in the Berne disputation in January 1528 helped him make contact with the European Reformation. In the disastrous sacramentary strife he continued taking part in advocating concord between the protestant theologians. That is why he joined Philip von Hessen in setting up the Marburg colloquium. Faced with whose partial failure, he did his best to encourage Zwingli's project of a defensive alliance among evangelical cities in Switzerland and in the South-West of Germany, called the “Burgrecht”. (shrink)

Karl Barth's review of Franz Overbeck's posthumously edited volume, “Christentum und Kultur”, was part of a larger and ongoing episode of theological name-calling in the early 1920s, one that involved numerous other personal relationships, events, letter-correspondence, and intellectual resources. The full story remains untold, however, and assessments of Overbeck's influence on the Swiss theologian have been inconclusive. In this article, I contextualize Barth's review and argue that the primary impetus for his interaction was the identification of important counter-criticisms to the (...) charges and accusations he was receiving from various reviewers of the first Romans commentary, Adolf von Harnack in particular. Following an introduction to Overbeck's life and thought, I provide an exposition of Barth's review. This occasional work operated on multiple levels: as a summary, polemical, and constructive piece. While Overbeck generally corroborated Barth's emerging two-world eschatology, reinvigorated the time-eternity and God-man diastases, and encouraged his thinking about Urgeschichte, these themes were important secondarily as the basis for a more general attack against theological accommodationism and bourgeois religion. Whatever Barth finally understood or misunderstood about Overbeck's critical thought and interpretation of early Christianity, it was the attack itself by Overbeck and especially the criticisms he produced against shared “liberal” opponents that were the initial objects of Barth's curiosity. (shrink)

This volume is a critical edition of the ten-year correspondence between Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, one of Europe’s most influential early modern thinkers, and Bartholomew Des Bosses, a Jesuit theologian who was keen to bring together Leibniz’s philosophy and the Aristotelian philosophy and religious doctrines accepted by his order. The letters offer crucial insights into Leibniz’s final metaphysics and into the intellectual life of the eighteenth century. Brandon C. Look and Donald Rutherford present seventy-one of Leibniz’s and Des Bosses’s letters in (...) the original Latin and in careful English translation. Few of the letters have been translated into English before. The editors also provide extensive annotations, deletions, and marginalia from Leibniz’s various drafts, and a substantial introduction setting the context for the correspondence and analyzing the main philosophical issues. (shrink)

This volume is a critical edition of the ten-year correspondence between Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, one of Europe’s most influential early modern thinkers, and Bartholomew Des Bosses, a Jesuit theologian who was keen to bring together Leibniz’s philosophy and the Aristotelian philosophy and religious doctrines accepted by his order. The letters offer crucial insights into Leibniz’s final metaphysics and into the intellectual life of the eighteenth century. Brandon C. Look and Donald Rutherford present seventy-one of Leibniz’s and Des Bosses’s letters in (...) the original Latin and in careful English translation. Few of the letters have been translated into English before. The editors also provide extensive annotations, deletions, and marginalia from Leibniz’s various drafts, and a substantial introduction setting the context for the correspondence and analyzing the main philosophical issues. (shrink)

_In this critical edition, Leibniz submits his metaphysics of substance and form, concomitance and expression, freedom and necessity to the searching Socratic interrogation of Arnauld_ In this critical edition, Stephen Voss establishes the text of the magnificent Socratic correspondence between Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Antoine Arnauld, provides an accurate English translation of the French text, and includes full apparatus helpful to student and scholar alike. The philosopher, physicist, and mathematician Leibniz presents the philosopher and theologian Arnauld with a unique new (...) metaphysics and hones his ongoing thinking on the critical responses he receives. The result is a dialogue capable of illuminating metaphysical thought even now. (shrink)

A scholarly edition of letters by Anne, Viscountess Conway, Henry More, and their friends. The edition presents an authoritative text, together with an introduction, commentary notes, and scholarly apparatus.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Thoughts on Why, How, and What Buddhists Can Learn from Christian TheologiansJohn MakranskyWith my co-panelists, I am asked to respond to the question: "Can and should Buddhists and Christians do theology (or Buddhology) together, and if so why and how?"1 I will respond as a Tibetan Buddhist of Nyingma tradition. My answer is "yes," we can and should, where "doing theology together" for me means learning things from Christian (...) theologians that illumine significant aspects of my Buddhist understanding. How is one to learn things for Buddhist understanding from Christian theology—what method should be used? I find the method of comparative theology, as developed recently by scholars such as Francis Clooney and James Fredericks, to be a productive approach for interreligious theological learning, including Christian-Buddhist learning. But first the question of why must be addressed: a Buddhist comparative theology must be motivated and informed by a theology of religions that convincingly articulates for Buddhists why they can learn things from religious others that can make a positive difference for their own understanding and practice of awakening.If the why and how to learn from religious others is well enough addressed, then one would have the motivation and orientation to explore specific Buddhist learnings from non-Buddhist theologies. In what follows, then, I will make a start at addressing the how, why and what of Buddhist interreligious learning by briefly summarizing the method of comparative theology, considerations toward developing a Buddhist theology of religions that can support such learning by Buddhists, and some examples of Christian themes that have been resources for my own learning.Comparative TheologyThe purpose of comparative theology is to learn from a different religious tradition in enough depth and specificity to shine significant new light on your own. By paying careful attention to elements of another religious tradition in their own context of doctrine and practice, your perspective on corresponding elements of your own faith may be shifted in ways that permit new insights to emerge. This does not merely [End Page 119] involve learning at a distance about other religious beliefs and cultures that leaves your own religious self-understanding unaffected. Rather, comparative theological analysis provides a method to learn from religious others in specific ways that newly inform your understanding of your own faith and may also energize and deepen your practice of it.2 For this kind of learning to occur, certain supportive dispositions are necessary, such as those identified in Catherine Cornille's book The Im-Possibilty of Interreligious Dialogue. These include: (1) doctrinal humility, the acknowledgment that the doctrinal formulations of your own tradition, including its formulations of other religions, are conditioned viewpoints that have never perfectly captured the whole truth; (2) knowledgeable commitment to your own religious tradition, so that whatever you learn from religious others may inform your religious community and tradition through you; and (3) in the context of potential Buddhists learning from Christians, a belief that there is enough common ground between Buddhism and Christianity that it is possible to hear things from Christians that make a positive difference for Buddhists in their own understanding and practice of awakening.3Theologies of ReligionsFor such dispositions to support comparative theological learning, in turn, they must be motivated and informed by an adequate theology of religions. A theology of religions is an understanding of other religious systems that explores their potential truth from within the theological framework of your own religious tradition. You can, as an individual, learn many things from other religions. But for your learning to inform not only yourself but also your religious community and tradition, it must make sense to your tradition in its own framework of understanding. And as Mark Heim, John Thatamanil, and Kristen Kiblinger have argued, behind any interest (or disinterest) in learning from other religions lies a theology of religions that is either conscious or unconscious.4 How do I see the potential to learn significant truths from religious others? If my theology of religions is uncritically exclusivist, I may see only errors in religious others unaware that my perspective on them is limited by my own vision. Or if my theology of religions is... (shrink)

Karin Peter and Nikolaus Wandinger, James G. Williams, and Mathias Moosbrugger give in their essays in this volume of Contagion some basic information about the correspondence between these two “beautiful minds”: René Girard and Raymund Schwager. I would now like to go “step-by-step” along the way of some selected letters, and this only insofar as they discussed the question of sacrifice.1 Going this way the reader can get an idea how these two men were dealing with each other. These excerpts (...) show on the one hand the dynamic of their correspondence, on the other hand the different positions of the partners. Girard is not a theologian, so he shows uncertainty with regard to theological questions. Schwager is firmly .. (shrink)

ABSTRACTIn this contribution, Susanne Hennecke considers the theological meaning of biographies on the basis of the correspondence between Christian theologian Karl Barth and Charlotte von Kirschbaum as it has been edited by Rolf-Joachim Erler in 2008. After a brief introduction into this correspondence, she divides her article into three parts, namely a biographical-historical part, a complementary biographical part, in which she examines the autobiographical material of the correspondence with regard to the self-manifestation of the relationship between the correspondents and a (...) systematic-theological part, in which she examines in four sub-items the correspondence for the theological self-interpretations of the relationship contained therein. (shrink)

Romano Guardini was one of the most important intellectuals of German Catholicism in the twentieth century. He influenced nearly an entire generation of German Catholic theologians and was the leading figure of the German Catholic youth movement as it grew exponentially in the 1920s. Yet there are many open questions about his early intellectual development and his academic contribution to religious, cultural, social and political questions in the Weimar Republic and in National Socialist Germany. This article draws upon Guardini’s (...) publications, the secondary literature on Guardini and on some archival material, seeking to outline his early development and his engagement with the ideological context following World War I and in National Socialist Germany. Here Guardini’s criticisms of the modern age are presented. Besides this many other issues are addressed, such as his criticism of the women’s movement, his understanding of the youth movement, reception of Carl Schmitt, views of race, interpretation of the controversial Volk-concept, contribution to a Jewish journal in 1933, and his basic positions on the issues of obedience, order and authority. While Guardini was viewed critically by some National Socialists in the Third Reich, the administrative correspondences on him in the 1940s actually show that there was an internal debate about him among the National Socialist officials. This involved different figures, including a diplomat who came to Guardini’s defense. The internal disagreements were made more complicated because Guardini’s brothers were apparently members of the Fascist Party in Italy at this time. (shrink)

Romano Guardini was one of the most important intellectuals of German Catholicism in the twentieth century. He influenced nearly an entire generation of German Catholic theologians and was the leading figure of the German Catholic youth movement as it grew exponentially in the 1920s. Yet there are many open questions about his early intellectual development and his academic contribution to religious, cultural, social and political questions in the Weimar Republic and in National Socialist Germany. This article draws upon Guardini’s (...) publications, the secondary literature on Guardini and on some archival material, seeking to outline his early development and his engagement with the ideological context following World War I and in National Socialist Germany. Here Guardini’s criticisms of the modern age are presented. Besides this many other issues are addressed, such as his criticism of the women’s movement, his understanding of the youth movement, reception of Carl Schmitt, views of race, interpretation of the controversial Volk-concept, contribution to a Jewish journal in 1933, and his basic positions on the issues of obedience, order and authority. While Guardini was viewed critically by some National Socialists in the Third Reich, the administrative correspondences on him in the 1940s actually show that there was an internal debate about him among the National Socialist officials. This involved different figures, including a diplomat who came to Guardini’s defense. The internal disagreements were made more complicated because Guardini’s brothers were apparently members of the Fascist Party in Italy at this time. (shrink)

Robert Chambers and Thomas Henry Huxley helped popularize science by writing for general interest publications when science was becoming increasingly professionalized. A non-professional, Chambers used his family-owned Chambers' Edinburgh Journal to report on scientific discoveries, giving his audience access to ideas that were only available to scientists who regularly attended professional meetings or read published transactions of such forums. He had no formal training in the sciences and little interest in advancing the professional status of scientists; his course of action (...) was determined by his disability and interest in scientific phenomena. His skillful reporting enabled readers to learn how the ideas that flowed from scientific innovation affected their lives, and his series of article in the Journal presenting his rudimentary ideas on evolution, served as a prelude to his important popular work, Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation. Huxley, an example of the new professional class of scientists, defended science and evolution from attacks by religious spokesmen and other opponents of evolution, informing the British public about science through his lectures and articles in such publications as Nineteenth Century. He understood that by popularizing scientific information, he could effectively challenge the old Tory establishment -- with its orthodox religious and political views -- and promote the ideas of the new class of professional scientists. In attempting to transform British society, he frequently came in conflict with theologians and others on issues in which science and religion seemed to contradict each other but refused to discuss matters of science with non-professionals like Chambers, whose popular writing struck a more resonant chord with working class readers. (shrink)

Die Jahre 1808-1810 sind für Friedrich Schleiermacher sowohl privat als auch beruflich und politisch von besonderer Bedeutung: Er heiratet 1809 die junge Witwe Henriette von Willich, wirkt an der Konzeption der Berliner Universität und ihren ersten Berufungen mit und übernimmt leitende Funktion in der preußischen Schulreform. Der Kommentarband zur den Briefbänden 10 und 11 der historisch-kritischen Briefausgabe Friedrich Schleiermachers bietet neben einem Stellenkommentar zu den Briefen 1808-1810 eine Einführung in die Korrespondenz mit Informationen zu den Korrespondenzpartnern dieser Jahre sowie eine (...) Chronologie mit den wichtigsten privaten und beruflichen Ereignissen aus Schleiermachers Leben. Für jede Briefpartnerin und jeden Briefpartner wird, sofern überliefert, jeweils ein Handschriftenbeispiel als Faksimile wiedergegeben. Ein Register führt neben den Personen- und Ortsnamen auch Werke und Bibelstellen an. (shrink)

In 2022, at an interdisciplinary conference on Creation and the Imago Dei, Biola psychologist Liz Hall posed a powerful challenge to the philosophers and theologians in the room. In the face of the “already and not yet” nature of Christian theology, she put forth the need for a “theology of tension.” Over and over again, while reading Biblical Philosophy, I was reminded of this challenge. The features Johnson puts forth as emblematic of Hebraic Philosophy can help in this respect, (...) in two clear ways: First, retrospectively, Johnson’s categories are useful for diagnosing both the philosophical missteps targeted by critiques of theodicy and the features held in common by some of the more successful accounts. Second, going forward, the convictions and modes of argument central to Hebraic philosophy may help guide future philosophical responses to suffering. In general, I believe that the philosophical problems related to suffering are especially well-suited to responses that are pixelated, networked, mysterianist, creationist, transdemographic, and ritualist. Perhaps Hebraic philosophy can succeed where Hellenist philosophy has struggled: in addressing the tension that arises from the experience of suffering in a world governed by a loving, providential, sovereign God. While I am largely in favor of Johnson’s Hebraic philosophy, I will conclude by breaking from his view in one important respect. Johnson presents the Biblical view as substantially contrasting with the correspondence theory affirmed by many contemporary philosophers. I will end by pushing back on this claim. On Johnson’s own account, the Hebraic notion of truth is determined with reference to the divinely designed order. I propose that we understand the Hebraic notion of truth as degrees of correspondence to this divinely ordered, absolute reality. (shrink)

It is necessary to take into account the data of science in the theoretical debates conducted by scientists contributing ontological theories in order to develop new approaches to theological issues in Islamic thought. Even, Kalam scholars with the duty of defending and basing the principles of Islam in the classical sense have established a theological understanding intertwined with science in understanding both existence philosophically and the Script theologically. With its discoveries and theories in the last century, it can be argued (...) that modern science has made a serious progress compared to the past. Maintaining its own methodology and paradigm, every scientific discipline has the opportunity to benefit from the methods and data of other disciplines. Consequently, it is possible to assert that Kalam can enjoy the same opportunity too, as long as staying in its own problem area. According to modern science, the motion system is the unity of structures that enable living things to move. Moreover, Bones and joints, which are the structures of the skeletal system, are passive elements of the movement system. Muscles, on the other hand, are the active elements of the movement system and provide the movement of the body by affecting the bones and joints. Muscle tissue shapes the body by adhering to the bones, besides enabling movement activity to occur. One of the most important systems that provide movement is the nervous system. Because for a person to have movement, the muscles must contract, and the muscles must be stimulated for the contraction of the muscles. The system that enables this contraction to occur is the nervous system. Energy is also required for contraction to occur in the human body. Muscles create energy for movement by first providing their energy from the ATP molecule present in the muscle cells. Considering the movement theories of classical theology scholars, it is seen that they shaped the occurrence of human actions through the concept of potency. While the scholars classify power as spiritual/mental and physical strength in terms of its structure, they have characterized it as accident in terms of its nature. In this context, we can say that the equivalent of the power, which is regarded as necessary for the formation of human acts by the theologians, is the movement system in today's science. The spirit/mental that scholars regard as a structure of power for the occurrence of human action can be regarded as the electrical activity that activates muscles when considered within the framework of the movement system of today's science. It is seen that Kalam scholars emphasize physical competence in their definitions of power as well. At this point, Ash'arians defined the power as the soundness of organs, Mu’tazila expressed it as the presence of organs and their being away from disasters, and the Mâturîdîs stated it as the organs being healthy. With these definitions, Kalam scholars mean that a person should also be physically competent to make a movement. The structures scientifically accepted as biological and physical competence in the movement system are the skeletal system, muscles and nervous system. Therefore, we can say that the strength of the physical fitness/well-being emphasized in the definition of power by theologians corresponds scientifically to the skeletal system, muscles and nervous system. One of the issues that Kalam scholars discuss about power is the issue of the accident of power. The reason why they describe power as an accident is to emphasize its impermanence and to show that it was created by Allah. So, in modern science, electrical activity must occur in the brain in order for human organs to move. The occurrence of this electrical activity is independent of the human being. The fact that electrical activity occurs independently from human beings shows that it conforms to Kalam scholars’ definition of the accident. As a result, we can say that the theory of power created by scholars for human movement has a counterpart in the movement system put forward by today's science. (shrink)

The present study aims to present a transcription and a commentary of three unpublished letters of the Dutch Cartesian philosopher Johannes de Raey, addressed to his former student Johannes Clauberg. Mainly containing suggestions concerning the defence of Cartesian philosophy and academic affairs, these letters, dating back to 1651, 1652 and 1661, bear witness of a steady friendship and of a certain cooperation in rebuking the critiques moved by Jacob Revius in his Statera philosophiae cartesianae and by Cyriacus Lentulus in his (...) Nova Renati Descartes sapientia, refuted in Clauberg’s Defensio cartesiana. According to these letters, this cooperation had to be kept secret, not to provoke the reaction of Leiden theologians. However, the violation of the correspondence of Clauberg and De Raey occasioned the edition of Lentulus’s book and the rise of the polemics over the new philosophy. Eventually, such cooperation is to be noticed also in some crypto-quotations between the edited texts of Clauberg and De Raey. (shrink)

According to many philosophical theologians, God is metaphysically simple: there is no real distinction among His attributes or even between attribute and existence itself. Here, I consider only one argument against the simplicity thesis. Its proponents claim that simplicity is incompatible with God’s having created another world, since simplicity entails that God is unchanging across possible worlds. For, they argue, different acts of creation involve different willings, which are distinct intrinsic states. I show that this is mistaken, by sketching (...) an adequate account of reasons-guided activity that does not require distinct intrinsic states of willing corresponding to each possible act of creation. (shrink)

The German theologian and philosopher, Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher, is important in hermeneutic history for at least two reasons. First, he initiated the transition of hermeneutics from rule‐governed interpretation in particular disciplines‐such as theology, law, and philology‐to a comprehensive analysis of human understanding as such. Second, he is not only the father of general hermeneutics, but also of modern theology. In developing his hermeneutic principles, Schleiermacher steers a middle path between the rationalist Enlightenment interpreters, and the historical‐critical philologists. The third (...) extreme he eschews is dogmatic biblical exegesis that, when it emphasizes the text's divine inspiration, results in disregard for historical particularity. Schleiermacher's hermeneutics tries to integrate the pre‐given ontological structures of language that shape an author's mind with the spiritual element. Every linguistic expression contains both the objective structural and subjective psychological aspects, which require the interpreter's corresponding grammatical (or comparative) and divinatory (or psychological) skills for determining meaning. (shrink)

As a physicist‐theologian, John Polkinghorne has done a great service for the community of scholars engaged in the theology‐and‐science dialogue as well as for a broader audience of interested persons. We examine Polkinghorne's theological method to see what it suggests about his understanding of the function of systematic theology and his philosophy of science. His strong emphasis on rationality in theology corresponds to his epistemological discussions. Polkinghorne links his methodology to “thinking,” so “experience” seems relegated to the minds, and not (...) the lives, of the believers. Consequently, his theology does not easily engage ethical, political, and cultural landscapes where the concrete contexts of particular people's lives engage their faith. The challenge for those of us in religion‐and‐science is to come to grips with this messy, complicated world. (shrink)

The Lutheran theologian and polemicist Matthias Flacius Illyricus (1520-75) organized an unprecedented collaborative project to write an encyclopedic Protestant church history, known as the Magdeburg Centuries (1559-74). At the planning stage in 1556, Flacius and his colleagues consulted with the Flemish jurist FranÁois Baudouin (1520-73). This article shows how, in this correspondence, ecclesiastical history became the workshop where legal and theological humanism met and interacted over issues of historical methodology. Two innovations are traced through the correspondence and into the finished (...) history: Flacius's organization of the material by commonplaces. (shrink)

As a physicist‐theologian, John Polkinghorne has done a great service for the community of scholars engaged in the theology‐and‐science dialogue as well as for a broader audience of interested persons. We examine Polkinghorne's theological method to see what it suggests about his understanding of the function of systematic theology and his philosophy of science. His strong emphasis on rationality in theology corresponds to his epistemological discussions. Polkinghorne links his methodology to “thinking,” so “experience” seems relegated to the minds, and not (...) the lives, of the believers. Consequently, his theology does not easily engage ethical, political, and cultural landscapes where the concrete contexts of particular people's lives engage their faith. The challenge for those of us in religion‐and‐science is to come to grips with this messy, complicated world. (shrink)

This edition contains the correspondence between Paul Tillich and his friend Fedor Stepun, a sociologist and philosopher of religion. Tillich and Stepun had been colleagues at Technische Universität Dresden in the mid 1920s. The correspondence covers the period between 1934 and 1964. The early letters address the situation in Germany during the onset of National Socialism: the so-called Röhm-Putsch, the Kirchenkampf, the institutional changes in the university system and, later, the dismissal of Stepun as professor in Dresden in 1937. After (...) a hiatus of several years, the correspondence continues in 1946. The correspondence shows the search for a new positioning in the postwar years, from the perspective of the émigré Paul Tillich and Stepun, the expert on Russia, who from Munich observed the political developments of the Cold War with great concern. Stepun consistently proves an acute critic of the political theologian Paul Tillich. In particular, Tillich's Christology and his program of religious socialism met with his friend's fierce criticism. (shrink)

The study Freedom from Dialogue: The Work of Radim Palouš in Conversation with Selected Philosophers and Theologians of Education presents the main themes of the life work of Radim Palouš, a prominent Czech philosopher of education working in the tradition of Comenius and Patočka. From those key themes, the author selects the concept of education and the concept of freedom and examines these in selected philosophers of education and theologians of education from around the world who also produced (...) their works in the twentieth or even twenty-first century, as Radim Palouš did. The purpose of the study is to provide contemporary educators and teachers with inspiration to deepen and develop the meaning of their activity, which consists in education and training, in cultivating man, or in bringing man to a free and responsible life, as this study particularly wants to emphasize. Jacques Maritain, Joseph Pieper, James Vincent Schall and Stratford Caldecott have been chosen as philosophers of education and theologians of education. All of them have dealt with the theme of freedom and the liberal arts and have attempted to suggest in their writings how man today might also be brought to the goal of educational endeavour, to the free assumption of his own responsibility for education. At specific points in the writings of selected philosophers and theologians of education, it is shown that true freedom is not created by human construction but is born in dialogue. Therefore, through a kind of dialogue between the Czech thinker and selected foreign thinkers, inspiration for today is sought. This is the first book publication in Czech that deals explicitly with theology of education and philosophy of education, their interrelationship, correspondences and differences. (shrink)

One of the important aspects of the classical kalām is that the philosophical topics related to physics and cosmology, namely daqīq or laṭīf al-kalām, have an important place in it. The reason for the involvement of the kalām scholars (mutakallimūn) in these kinds of issues is commonly regarded as an effort to defend Islamic beliefs against other religions and thought systems. However, when their studies are examined closely, the complexity of their concepts and theories, as well as the fact that (...) they discussed these matters not only with opposing groups but also among themselves, show that kalām had a much deeper and integrated relationship with science and philosophy in the classical period. Their engagement with philosophical and scientific matters, such body (jism), substance/atom (jawhar), accident (ʿaraḍ), motion, space, time, and causality dates back to the mid-8th century and displays great diversity. Although the mutakallimūn probably were the first ones to deal with physics-related issues in Islamic thought, it cannot be said that they are given the importance they deserve in modern studies pertaining to the history of science and philosophy in Islamic thought. The fact that, in kalām works, physics-related questions were generally discussed along with theological matters has caused the scholarship of mutakallimūn to be regarded as an adjunct of apologetic discipline and has thereby led to a limited description of kalām’s relationship with science and philosophy in the classical period. This set of circumstances hinders a proper understanding of how science and philosophy emerged and evolved in Islamic thought. In the present article, I will attempt to present the place and role of physical topics, namely daqīq or laṭīf al-kalām, in classical kalām, between the 9th and 11th centuries. Firstly, I will show how the classical mutakallimūn divided kalām into two parts, namely ‘major’ (jalīl) matters, which are based on revelation, and ‘subtle’ (daqīq) or ‘obscure’ (laṭīf) matters, which mainly depend on reason. Matters surrounding jalīl al-kalām indicate the theological problems on which the mutakallimūn had a general agreement, such as God’s oneness, revelation, prophethood, and eschatology. Questions discussed under the category of daqīq or laṭīf al-kalām mostly correspond to philosophical and scientific issues concerning epistemology, physics, and cosmology. Secondly, I will examine to what extent the mutakallimūn dealt with physical sciences and what kind of topics were primarily discussed in the field of daqīq or laṭīf al-kalām. The upshot of this will be that the claim that the mutakallimūn were interested in physics and cosmology merely for apologetic purposes is unsound; rather, in the 9th and 10th centuries, many Muslim theologians also concerned themselves with issues such as motion, void, body, and causality as truth seekers. That being the case, the mutakallimūn should be taken into consideration in studies related to the emergence and rise of science and philosophy in Islamic thought. (shrink)

While the great medieval philosopher, theologian, and physician Maimonides is acknowledged as a leading Jewish thinker, his intellectual contacts with his surrounding world are often described as related primarily to Islamic philosophy. Maimonides in His World challenges this view by revealing him to have wholeheartedly lived, breathed, and espoused the rich Mediterranean culture of his time.Sarah Stroumsa argues that Maimonides is most accurately viewed as a Mediterranean thinker who consistently interpreted his own Jewish tradition in contemporary multicultural terms. Maimonides spent (...) his entire life in the Mediterranean region, and the religious and philosophical traditions that fed his thought were those of the wider world in which he lived. Stroumsa demonstrates that he was deeply influenced not only by Islamic philosophy but by Islamic culture as a whole, evidence of which she finds in his philosophy as well as his correspondence and legal and scientific writings. She begins with a concise biography of Maimonides, then carefully examines key aspects of his thought, including his approach to religion and the complex world of theology and religious ideas he encountered among Jews, Christians, Muslims, and even heretics; his views about science; the immense and unacknowledged impact of the Almohads on his thought; and his vision of human perfection.This insightful cultural biography restores Maimonides to his rightful place among medieval philosophers and affirms his central relevance to the study of medieval Islam. (shrink)

In 1925, the French Jesuit geologist, paleontologist, and theologian Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was removed from his teaching position at the Institut Catholique in Paris. He spent most of the next twenty years in China and his major theological writings were not published during his lifetime. We have uncovered major new archival sources on the investigation of Teilhard by the Jesuit curia and the Holy Office of the Roman Catholic Church. These include the Six Propositions to which he was required (...) to subscribe, which are here published and analyzed for the first time, along with his subscription. Associated correspondence, including a letter written by Teilhard to the Jesuit superior general Wlodimir Ledóchowski, enables a fuller understanding of Teilhard's response to the investigation of him. Moreover, comparison with similar investigations into other theologians in the first half of the 1920s allows an assessment of how the complex power dynamics between the Jesuit curia, the Holy Office, and Pope Pius XI shaped the outcome. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Erictho and Demogorgon: Poetry against Metaphysics DAVID QUINT Epic without the gods? The Roman poet Lucan (39–65 ce) created a secular counter-epic inside classical epic, removing the genre’s usual pantheon of Olympian deities and replacing them with Fortune. His Bellum civile (titled De bello civili in manuscripts, alternately titled Pharsalia) a poem about the conflict between Julius Caesar and Pompey, thereby delegitimizes the emperors who succeeded the dying Roman (...) republic, including Nero, the reigning emperor of Lucan’s day.1 They are not part of a divine plan: no such plan has ever existed. In an epic where the gods are silent or refuse to speak, Pompey’s son, Sextus, anxious to know the future, has to seek other means. In Book 6, he consults the Thessalian witch Erictho about the outcome of the approaching battle in Pharsalia. She reanimates the corpse of a dead soldier on Pompey’s republican side and makes it talk (BC 6.419–830).2 Lucan’s scene of necromancy gave birth to a major antimetaphysical strain in the European literary tradition. Among others, Dante, Cervantes, Marlowe, Spenser, Goethe, and Shelley confronted this episode of the Pharsalia and pondered its implications. Erictho’s magic is a figure for poetic making itself. It turns the supernatural into theater— the divine machinery of epic exposed as a deus ex machina— and these authors’ responses to Erictho will shift from epic into dramatic forms. In place of the gods, in place of the epic visit to the underworld, particularly in place of and in response to Aeneas’s trip to the realm of the dead arion 28.2 fall 2020 2 erictho and demogorgon in the corresponding Book 6 of the Aeneid, Lucan presents Erictho’s macabre performance: human witchcraft and intimations of an alternate, eerie numen residing in the earth, a force of nature. Subsequent readers would give this latter power a name: Demogorgon.3 Lucan links republicanism and freedom to a kind of atheism and to historical contingency. He unmasks and strips the props of religion from Caesarism and monarchy. (In vain for the poet: Lucan was forced to commit suicide in 65 ce, after he was implicated in the failed Pisonian conspiracy against Nero.) Lucan desacralizes poetry itself, which here confesses its limits, which are the limits of human mortality, even as Erictho seems, however briefly, to overcome them. No, poetry cannot literally raise the dead: it is a magic trick that makes the words on the page form into images, take life, and speak to us. Lucan answers the criticisms the philosopher and theologian make to poetry by openly acknowledging the false bottom of the hat from which poetry pulls its rabbits. It has no access to a real bottom, an underworld beyond death; it is all representation.4 The philosopher and the theologian may be poets no less than he is, but they do not want to know it, too busy, perhaps, in supporting tyranny over human minds and bodies. Plato and Augustine are two such critics on either historical side of Lucan, and they help us to understand the stakes of the Roman poet’s project. Both were dissatisfied with literature and they wanted to be something more than the great rhetoricians that they were. In the Symposium, Plato demystifies the archetypal myth of poetry, the singing of Orpheus that sought to bring Eurydice back from death: the gods sent Orpheus away from Hades empty-handed and showed him the mere shadow [eidolon] of the woman he had come to seek: Eurydice herself they would not let him take, because he seemed, like the mere minstrel that he was, to be a lukewarm lover, lacking the courage to die as Alcestis died for love, and choosing rather to scheme his way, living, into Hades. And it was for this that the gods doomed him, and doomed him justly, David Quint 3 to meet his death at the hands of women. (179d)5 Behind the words of his shallowly sentimental speaker Phaedrus we can detect Plato’s familiar hostility to poetry, his objection in Book 10 of the Republic that the poet merely imitates the appearances of things and is... (shrink)

Historical, critical edition of Schleiermacher's complete works including his unpublished writings, correspondence and translations.

Historical, critical edition of Schleiermacher's complete works including his unpublished writings, correspondence and translations.

Historical, critical edition of Schleiermacher's complete works including his unpublished writings, correspondence and translations.

"L'esprit d'aventure animait-il Pierre Teilhard de Chardin? Il ne suffit pas, pour répondre, de rappeler la devise que lui applique l'un de ses amis, George Barbour : "Ut migraturus habita. Vis comme si tu allais partir." Il ne suffit pas non plus de trouver sous sa plume ce bel aveu : "Je ne saurais désormais être autre chose qu'une sorte d'aventurier spirituel." Il faut le suivre dans ses multiples voyages, lire son abondante correspondance, l'entendre se plaindre d'être retenu à Pékin (...) durant la Seconde Guerre mondiale sans aucun terrain d'action, ou encore douter que la Croisière Jaune puisse lui être utile. Il faut aussi l'écouter se plaindre que le christianisme a perdu l'esprit d'aventure et le voir s'engager lui-même dans les zones laissées en blanc, celles où le savoir comme le croire perdent pied et où le réel reprend tout son pouvoir. Une invitation à mettre les pas dans ceux de ce gentilhomme aux semelles de vent."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

This article will examine McCormick's moral epistemology both at the level of how human persons know values and disvalues, which hereinafter will be referred to as synderesis, and at the level of how human persons know the rightness and wrongness of an action, which hereinafter will be referred to as normative moral judgment. On the one hand, from this investigation it appears that McCormick operates with a dual moral epistemology, at least at the level of synderesis. This means that at (...) one point in time it appears that a significant shift may have occurred in his moral epistemology at the level of synderesis. This may also be true at the level of normative moral judgment. On the other hand, McCormick's moral epistemology may in fact be a synthesis, which is the product of development and maturity in his thought process. This article will articulate, examine, and analyse both moral epistemologies. The first moral epistemology is operative in McCormick's writing up until 1983. The second moral epistemology corresponds to McCormick's decision in 1983 to write primarily in the area of bioethics from a theological perspective. Since the year 1983 seems to be the pivotal time when these two moral epistemologies converge, I will refer to the first moral epistemology as “prior to 1983” and I will refer to the second moral epistemology as “after 1983.” Because of the numerous criticisms that surround McCormick's moral epistemology, and the ambiguity that it entails, McCormick needed to articulate his theoretical foundations clearly and develop them systematically and coherently. Numerous moral theologians called for him to do this, yet he never responded. A systematic understanding of McCormick's moral epistemology is not only necessary but crucial in examining various issues in bioethics. It is necessary because it is the basis of moral decision making. It is crucial because the life and death of individuals may hang in the balance. (shrink)

Among the hidden treasures squirreled away in the archives of Israel’s National Library lies a fragmented correspondence that sheds new light on the afterlife of a project that was long deemed the farewell gift to the German language and culture from the remnants of its Jewry. It is an exchange of letters between two scholars, whose interest in the German rendition of the Bible occupied them for many years, first in Germany, and later in the land where Hebrew was vernacular (...) and where one might think there would no longer be a need for translations of the Bible; particularly not into a language that aroused considerable aversion in the aftermath of the war. And yet, the 1963–64 exchange between the two Jerusalemites, the Vienna-born and Frankfurt-crowned philosopher, theologian, and translator Martin Buber and the Riga-born, Berlin- and Marburg-educated biblical scholar Nechama Leibowitz tells a different story. It shows they both believed the project that began under the title Die Schrift, zu verdeutschen unternommen should be revised once again, after its completion so as to underline its ongoing relevance for present and future readings of the Bible tout court, in German and Hebrew speaking lands alike. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungDieser Beitrag konzentriert sich auf eine starke und auf eine schwache Seite von Bayers Zugang zu Luthers Theologie. So wird als Stärke angesehen, dass das Thema der Rechtfertigung in Luthers Theologie als allumfassend angesetzt wird. Dagegen besteht eine Schwäche in der Art und Weise, wie Bayer durch Luthers Dialektik der zwei Arten, in denen Gott sich verbirgt – also verborgen »unter dem Gegenteil« und absolut verborgen – hindurch bricht, indem er die beiden trennt und diese Aufteilung als Kriterium verwendet, um (...) zwischen einer Periode, in der Luther die reformatorische Einsicht vollständig ausarbeitet, und einem vor-reformatorischen Luther zu unterscheiden. Diese Luther-Interpretation sollte nochmals überdacht werden, denn sie verneint die Entsprechung und die kontrapunktisch zu verstehende Beziehung zwischen dieser doppelten Verborgenheit im Lichte des »offenbaren Gottes«. Ein ähnliches Problem taucht dann auf, wenn Bayer die Rede vom dreieinigen Gott, die ausschließlich am Evangelium orientiert ist, unterscheidet von einer allgemeinen Art und Weise, von Gott zu reden, die allein auf dem Gesetz basiert. Luthers Vorstellung, dass die Unterscheidung zwischen Gesetz und Evangelium vollständig in Gottes Offenbarung des Evangeliums integriert ist, widerspricht einer solchen Unterscheidung. Dieser Beitrag betrachtet nicht nur die Unterscheidung zwischen einem unreifen und einem reifen Luther, der alle Implikationen der reformatorischen Einsicht ausgearbeitet hat, als unnötig, sondern er würdigt den jungen Luther als einen Theologen, der in der Lage ist, dasjenige zusammen zu halten, was beim späten Luther auseinander zu fallen droht. Glücklicherweise beinhaltet Bayers Studie auch Anknüpfungsmöglichkeiten für eine solche Interpretation Luthers, die die positiven ebenso wie die negativen Aspekte beider Arten der Verborgenheit ebenso wie Gesetz und Evangelium in einem einzigen kontinuierlichen Prozess integriert.SummaryThis contribution concentrates on one strong and one weak side of Bayer's approach to Luther's theology. It finds a strength in the universally implemented theme of justification in Luther's theological thought. A weakness is however found in the way Bayer breaks through Luther's dialectics concerning the dual way God hides himself – i. e. hidden ‘under the opposite’ and absolutely hidden – by separating them and using this division as a criterion to distinguish between the period where Luther had fully worked out the insight of the Reformation and the pre-Reformation Luther. Such an interpretation of Luther needs to be reconsidered because it neglects the correspondence and the contrapuntal relation between this double hiddeness in the light of the ‘revealed God’.A similar problem arises when Bayer divides speaking about the triune God, which is exclusively orientated towards the Gospel, from a general way of speaking about God, which is only based on the Law. Luther's idea that the distinction between Law and Gospel is fully integrated into God's revelation of the Gospel contradicts such a division.This contribution considers not only a distinction between an immature and a mature Luther who has worked out all the implications of the reformation insight unnecessary, but appreciates the young Luther as a theologian who is capable of holding together what the later Luther is in danger of letting fall apart. Fortunately, in Bayer's study there are also openings for a Luther interpretation that includes the positive as well as the negative aspect of both kinds of hiddeness and of Law and Gospel in a single continuous process. (shrink)

The topic of disinterested love became fashionable in 1697 due to the famous amour pur dispute between Fénelon (1651-1715) and Bossuet (1627-1704). It soon attracted the attention of Electress Sophie of Hanover (1630-1714) and she asked for an opinion about the dispute from her trusted friend and correspondent, the Hanoverian councilor Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716). This gave Leibniz an opportunity to present his views on the matter, which he had developed earlier in his career (for example, in Elementa juris naturalis (...) of 1671 and Codex iuris gentium of 1693). In his 1697 letter to Sophie he did not explicitly take sides in the dispute, but formulated his own views on the topic in a theological manner, aiming to provide an account of disinterested love which would surpass the doctrines of both French theologians. In addition to presenting Leibniz’ early views on disinterested love and examining this alternative formulation of his views on love, I will show that after the letter Leibniz gave this alternative perspective up and returned to his earlier, more philosophical views on the topic, which suggests that he regarded them to be superior to the theological version, where the virtue of charity was related to the virtue of hope. (shrink)

The aim of my dissertation is to investigate how universal concepts are formed according to the later medieval Franciscan theologian Peter Auriol (d. 1322). Specifically, in the dissertation I inquiry into the relation between Auriol's ontology - according to which only individuals, and not universals, have real, extra-mental existence - and his philosophical psychology, a study of how extra-mental particulars can give rise to universal concepts, according to Auriol's view. In the past academic year I refined the topic of my (...) PhD thesis in two ways : first, I have delineated the definitive table of content ; second, I have wrote down the results of my research. The thesis comprises two volumes. The second one contains a collation of Peter Auriol's,Reportatio II, d. 9, qq. 2 - 3. The text has been obtained by confronting two manuscripts, considered as the exemplars of the two main families that convey his Second Book of the Sentences: ms. Firenze, Biblioteca nazionale centrale, ms. conv. soppr. A.3.120 (Fb); (iii) il ms. Padova, Biblioteca Antoniana, ms. 161 scaff. IX (Pg). The first volume, instead, has been divided into five chapters: the first two offer a historical introduction, while the remaining three are dedicated to the study of Auriol's doctrine, starting from the analysis of the text proposed in the collation, then extending the investigation to all the documentary heritage available relating to the Franciscan master. The first chapter provides a survey of the main theories of the universals of the early fourteenth century, taking into account in particular the opinions of those thinkers who, like Duns Scotus, in addition to marking a philosophical era, have been significant for Auriol's developing of his theory of universals. These are: John Duns Scotus, Henry of Harclay, Walter Bulery and Hervaeus Natalis. In order to properly understand the philosophical proposal of the Doctor facundus, it is necessary to know how it fits into a debate that in the academic debate of the fourteenth century. The second chapter is mainly aimed at the identification of the sources of Rep. II, d. 9, qq. 2 - 3. In the quaestio secunda, Auriol deals with the foundation of the universals. In a.1, he discusses the opinion of multiwho he labels as 'platonic'. We tried, therefore, to detect the targets of his criticism. Burley, Wylton, Bacon, Duns Scotus have been identified as possible addresses. In a. 2 of the same question, Auriol analyzes the position of Duns Scotus on the common nature. It has been then hypothesized that the two articles - aa. 1-2 - has to be considered as a general presentation and specific case of it; as a thesis common to several forms of realism and the realism of one of its most important interpreters. The third chapter focuses Auriol's criticism of the different forms of realism reported in a. 1 and of Duns Scotus's theory, as it is found in a. 2. In both cases, Auriol reproaches the realists for breaking the unity of substance, into a multiplicity of formalitatesreally occurring in reand corresponding to the concepts of genus and difference. On the contrary, Auriol maintains that universal concepts have no unity in the extra-mental reality. Only individuals really exist and numerical unity the only fully existing unity. As a consequence, the unity of the universal concept is just similitudinaria,that is only given a concept. Successively, the criticisms that Auriol makes to the principle of individuation are considered. Generally speaking, everything that exists, insofar as it exists, is singular, according to him. It is a primitive fact and it is not, therefore, necessary to search for the causes of its individuation. Thus, mirroring the structure of the quaestio secunda, in q. 3, Auriol discusses, in the first place, Duns Scotus's position and secondly a group of theories, arisen during the scholastic debate between the end of the thirteenth and the beginning of the fourteenth century. Interestingly, to reconstruct this set of doctrines, Auriol follows almost literally the reconstruction that Scotus himself makes of the same theories in his Ordinatio. Now, relying on the assumption that everything that exists is individual, Auriol gives shape to the notions of individuality and singularity and their mutual difference. This is one of the hubs of the dissertation. According to Auriol, a singularity is an entity that does not admit the existence of other realities that can be considered as similar with it. In this sense, God is the only authentic singularity. Ordinary reality, on the other hand, is made up of individualities. An individuality is an entity that, being finite, does not exhaust in itself the totality of the species to which it belongs (as far as the species as such exists only in virtue of an act of the intellect), admits the existence of other realities conceivable as similar with it. Thus, inasmuch as reality is made up of individuals or individualities, the mind is able to form the corresponding universal concepts. Being finite, for Auriol, is the condition of the validity of universals. In this respect, the relation between the concept of individuality and that of singularity is taken into account. Subsequently, we analyze the function of the category of Quantity, as it is related to individuality. According to Auriol, Quantity has no individuating capacity. At most, in bodily substances, it functions as principle of distinction. Being, in fact, discrete realities, a material substance spatially ends where another one begins. The fourth chapter is a kind of juncture between the third one, in which the structure of the concrete individual is analyzed, and the fifth one, in which the cognitive side of the process of concept formation is discussed. What is discussed here are the rationes. According to Auriol, the rationesare the basic units that constitute the quiddity of each individual and serve to direct our thought to form certain concepts. Each concept is the concept of a ratio,indeed. In this respect, Auriol claims that, say, Socrates has the rationes substance, corporeality, sensitivity, rationality. Additionally, rationes of the same type occurring in different objects are "maximally similar" (simillimae). For example, the rationesof Socrates are utterly similar with those of Plato (Cf. Scriptum, d. 2, q. 1, a. 4). Therefore, although these rationes are non-universal characteristics - inasmuch as a ratio belongs to one and only one individual - due to their maximal similarity they do count as the extramental ground for our general concepts (Cf.II Sent., d. 9, q. 3, a. 1). According to these premises, Auriol can hold that different singulars can be mutually highly similar, without participating in the same common nature (Cf. II Sent., d. 9, q. 3, a. 3).At the same time, it is relevant to note these rationesdo not compromise the unity of an existing particular. Rather each ratiocoagulates into each other giving birth to the individual's ultimate ratio. This final ratiois an indivisible ratio (ratio atoma), which cannot be further specified or divided (II Sent., d. 9, q. 3). According to Auriol, then, the rationesqua rationesdo not exist in extra-mental reality. Rather, the exist as such only in virtue of an act of the intellect. This means that they have an ambiguous being. On the one hand, they indicate a nature that cannot be altered by the intellect. On the other, the need the mind's activity to exist as rationes. According to Auriol, therefore, the rationesare independent of any cognitive act, with regard to the content they express, while they depend on mind's activity with regard to their unity and their existence. Now, the opaqueness concerning the ontological consistency of rationesdirectly depends on Auriol's understanding of cognition. Chapter five mainly deals with the different stages of the process of formation of the universal concept. In this respect, the notion of impressiois what is firstly analyzed. The impressionescan be considered, for Auriol, as the rationesthat are 'deposited' in the intellect and constitute, in cooperation with the cognitive faculty, what the Franciscan theologian calls the actus intellectus. The intellectual act, according to Auriol, is an entity composed of the impressed similarity of the object and the intellectual power, in fact. Moreover, in his view, it is really identical to the intelligible species. Now, the identity that the Franciscan theologian establishes between these two noetic tools, which were traditionally considered as distinct, imposes a reinterpretation of the notion of species. Coinciding with the act, the species can no longer be considered as an entity juxtaposed to it, deputed to the activation of the cognitive process performed by the intellect. Indeed, all those theories of universal concepts that add other noetic tools to the act, be they a species, a quality, or something else, would necessarily compromise intellection, preventing it from having acquaintance with extra-mental reality. According to Auriol, considering intellectual cognition as a connotation allows us to avoid such inconveniences. According to this view, the intellectual cognition must be regarded as an activity that poses nothing but to allow something to appear to the cognizer. In this respect, the concept, for Auriol, is nothing but the real object qua appearingto the intellect, fully identical with the intellectual act in recto,while denominatively distinct in obliquo. In this perspective, the definition of intellection that the Franciscan theologian proposes is analyzed, trying, in particular, to determine the ontological status of the concept and its epistemological function. In conclusion, with this study we have tried to give an account of Auriol's philosophical attitude, of the scope of his theory of universals, focusing on the relationship between ontology and philosophical psychology. Using Auriol's texts and specifically the collation of Rep. II, d. 9, qq. 2 - 3, the answers to these questions were searched for in the words of the Franciscan theologian himself. The picture emerged is that of an autonomous, critical thinker, but perfectly inserted in the historical context in which he lives. A thinker who places himself, so to speak, halfway between Duns Scotus's realism and Ockham's nominalism, nevertheless succeeding, albeit with some opacity, in balancing an ontology in which the metaphysical priority is granted only to the individual and the universal concepts have a solid foundation and validity. (shrink)