scholarly journals La correspondencia entre Jacques Maritain y Étienne Gilson (1924-1925). Comentarios a Saint Thomas d'Aquin y a Trois réformateurs

Author(s):  
CEFERINO MUÑOZ MEDINA ◽  
JUAN HEIREMANS CORREA
2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-189
Author(s):  
Gaven Kerr ◽  

After the emergence of the neo-Thomist movement in the early twentieth century, the question of how best to present Aquinas’s latent epistemological realism came to the fore. Léon Noël was an important contributor to this area of neo-Thomism, but his work has unfortunately been eclipsed by that of other more recognizable authors such as Etienne Gilson and Jacques Maritain. Noël argued that Aquinas’s realism is a form of immediate realism that recognizes the challenge of modern representationalist epistemologies but does not succumb to non-realist ways of thinking. Hence Noël presented immediate realism as an epistemological position that is inspired by Aquinas but also capable of addressing philosophical concerns that emerged after his death. In this article I present Noël’s view as interesting in its own right and capable of engaging with contemporary non-Thomist trends in epistemology.


2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-75
Author(s):  
Ceferino P. D. Muñoz ◽  
Juan Heiremans Correa

El siguiente escrito muestra el breve pero enjundioso intercambio epistolar entre quizás los dos filósofos cristianos más importantes del siglo XX: Étienne Gilson y Jacques Maritain. Las cartas están centradas en torno a algunas de las tantas temáticas que inquietaron a los tomistas del siglo pasado –la intuición de Dios, el primer objeto de la inteligencia, la función propia del intelecto humano, entre otras– y que aun muestran su plena actualidad en el debate contemporáneo. Ofrecemos la primera traducción al español de las cartas enviadas en el año 1923 –inicio de una fructífera correspondencia entre ambos filósofos–, con ocasión de la publicación de la segunda edición de El tomismo, uno de los libros más emblemáticos de Gilson.


2018 ◽  
Vol 92 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-311
Author(s):  
Daniel J. Simpson ◽  

Can a work of art be defective aesthetically as art because it is defective morally? Étienne Gilson and Jacques Maritain both develop Thomistic accounts of the arts based on Aquinas’s distinction between the virtues of art and prudence, but they answer this question differently. Although their answers diverge, I will argue that both accounts make a crucial assumption about the metaphysics of goodness that Aquinas denies: that moral and aesthetic goodness are distinct species, not inseparable modes, of metaphysical goodness. I propose a new way to develop a Thomistic account of the arts that begins with Aquinas’s treatment of the three inseparable modes of metaphysical goodness: the virtuous, the useful, and the pleasant. This foundation seems metaphysically, methodologically, and explanatorily prior to the accounts of Gilson and Maritain, because art is a virtue, and virtue is related to goodness, and goodness is “divided” into three inseparable modes.


2019 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 287-304
Author(s):  
Ian Curran

Teilhard de Chardin has been criticized by both Roman Catholic (Etienne Gilson, Jacques Maritain, and Dietrich von Hildebrand) and Protestant (David Lane and Jurgen Moltmann) theologians for allegedly promulgating a heterodox, modernist version of Gnosticism that substitutes a naturalistic account of evolution for the supernatural Christian story of redemption in Christ, departs from scriptural and classical theological norms, gives primacy to scientific over theological reasoning, and articulates a vision of pure immanence. Teilhard’s theological integration of salvation and evolution in The Human Phenomenon and other works is, however, grounded in an implicitly figural interpretation of history that is both scriptural and classical in inspiration. Reading Teilhard’s early essay, ‘Cosmic Life,’ through the studies of Erich Auerbach, Leonard Goppelt, and Tibor Fabiny on figural interpretation demonstrates that Teilhard describes evolutionary history as a typological anticipation for the coming Christ, thus refuting misconstruals of his theology as gnostic, heterodox, naturalistic, and immanentalist.


2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 149
Author(s):  
Carlo Leonardi

Nel breve spazio del presente lavoro, intendo dar conto dell’“habitus teologico” che caratterizza lo stile filosofico di Alasdair MacIntyre : “religiously musical” è infatti — a mio avviso — il più insolito, e allo stesso tempo il più suadente, epiteto attribuito al filosofo scozzese dai teologi James Gustafson e Stanley Hauerwas . Tale habitus è altresì esaltato dalla diffusa propensione a saldare insieme — senza apparente soluzione di continuità — il modus philosophandi macintyriano e alcune recenti figure della teologia cristiana post–liberale e post–moderna, di cui ci occuperemo in seguito: soprattutto la “teologia narrativa” di Hans Frei, George Lindbeck, et. al., ma anche la “radical orthodoxy” di John Milbank, Catherine Pickstock, Graham Ward, et. al. Sebbene MacIntyre non abbia replicato direttamente a simili tentativi di “appropriazione teologica” del suo pensiero, ritengo, comunque, che i tempi siano maturi per riconoscere — a lui e al “tomismo analitico” — un ruolo sui generis nell’evoluzione della tradizione aristotelico–tomista del XX secolo : ruolo distinto, ma non separato, rispetto a quello coevo di quanti — in ambito continentale — hanno tenacemente proseguito la ricerca filosofica e teologica nel solco di Tommaso, come ad esempio Marie–Dominique Chenu, Yves Congar, Cornelio Fabro, Etienne Gilson, Jacques Maritain, Edith Stein, et al. 


Author(s):  
Matthew Bagot

One of the central questions in international relations today is how we should conceive of state sovereignty. The notion of sovereignty—’supreme authority within a territory’, as Daniel Philpott defines it—emerged after the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 as a result of which the late medieval crisis of pluralism was settled. But recent changes in the international order, such as technological advances that have spurred globalization and the emerging norm of the Responsibility to Protect, have cast the notion of sovereignty into an unclear light. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the current debate regarding sovereignty by exploring two schools of thought on the matter: first, three Catholic scholars from the past century—Luigi Sturzo, Jacques Maritain, and John Courtney Murray, S.J.—taken as representative of Catholic tradition; second, a number of contemporary political theorists of cosmopolitan democracy. The paper argues that there is a confluence between the Catholic thinkers and the cosmopolitan democrats regarding their understanding of state sovereignty and that, taken together, the two schools have much to contribute not only to our current understanding of sovereignty, but also to the future of global governance.


2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Eduardo Eduardo Carreño P. ◽  
Alejandro Serani M
Keyword(s):  

<p>En este artículo se aporta una clarificación del estatuto que les compete a la paleontología y a otras disciplinas. Tomando como fundamento la epistemología<br />desarrollada por Jacques Maritain, sostenemos que esta clase de indagaciones, por su objeto pretérito y contingente, y por su metodología interpretativa, constituyen un tipo epistemológico específico, diferente del de la ciencia, que aquí catalogamos como histórico-natural.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document