The Priority of the Perfect in the Philosophical Theology of the Continental Rationalists

Author(s):  
ROBERT MERRIHEW ADAMS

This chapter examines the concept of the priority of the perfect in continental rationalists’ philosophical theology. It suggests that the less perfect or complete needs to be understood in terms of what is more perfect and complete and this is called the top-down strategy. It argues that divine knowledge constitutes a kind of perfect ideal or archetype which human knowledge imperfectly resembles or approaches and contends that man’s knowledge and thought could be to God’s rather as a dog’s is to man’s.

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (21) ◽  
pp. 29-39
Author(s):  
Oleh �. Radchenko ◽  

by the famous Swiss literary scholar Emil Staiger and to present it to Ukrainian explorers for the first time. Due to the complex application of the historical-cultural, comparative, descriptive methods, the methods of linguistic-stylistic and figurative analysis, the authentic change of the traditional angle of interpretation has been identified: it eliminates the motif of the ancestral curse based on the Theban cycle of myths and shifts the emphasis on personal guilt. It is established that Staiger departs from the traditional explanation of category ??????? as �error� and interprets it as a deep cause of offense, which lies within ourselves, but is devoid of malice, which weighs all the consequences and pursues a specific goal. A �plastic Greek� perceives his guilt as destiny, and destiny differs from conscious activity. It is noted that the researcher distinguishes the work of Sophocles from a number of �tragedies of fate�, recognizing the oracle as a core element of dramatic tension creation. Moreover, the oracle is not interpreted as a symbol of blind reign of eternal fate, but only as a sign of infinite divine knowledge. Thus, the central conflict of the tragedy is the antagonism between Apollo and Oedipus, the god and the mortal: it is not a matter of showing that everything on earth is predetermined, but of distinguishing between infallible knowledge of god and limited knowledge of man and illustrating the gap between man and god. �Know thyself!� � know that you are a human, not a god � this famous aphorism can be considered the idea of tragedy, and Oedipus is the embodiment of the finiteness of human knowledge. It is stated that due to the motive of the court the whole tragedy is perceived as a model of Staiger�s dramatic style (observability of the action, brief description of the characters, conciseness of language). It is notable that the role of judge takes the protagonist himself and he finds the criminal in himself. So the movement returns to its starting point: the circle composition in �Oedipus the King� becomes a loop that is tightened around the neck of the hero. The interpreter names it �tragic irony�, which permeates the semantic outline of the work (especially the double meaning of the words of the characters) and it is manifested in each plot (the man himself fulfils the prophecy, trying hard to divert it). Staiger`s distinctive interpretation of the problem of freedom is emphasized: no matter how deceived Oedipus goes, he comes to admit his guilt and realize the need for punishment, and in the choice of punishment lies his freedom. Ultimately, Oedipus must be defeated in order to preserve the truth of the divine word. However, wilful acceptance of punishment is not a reconciliation of freedom (the hero fought against his fate) and necessity (he lost the fight against fate) in the classical sense, but rather it is related to the tragic emotions, which cause admiration.


Méthexis ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-90
Author(s):  
DANIELLE A. LAYNE

To dismiss the problems of Socratic moral intellectualism as well as Socratic irony (with respect to his claims of ignorance) in the following we shall first discuss how there are different forms of not-knowing in the Platonic dialogues. By referencing various passages throughout Plato’s entire corpus we shall see that like his nuanced understanding of knowledge, Plato also delineated between kinds of ignorance with only one denying virtue and the good life to individuals. This will prove that Socrates does not associate with a reprehensible state when he claims ignorance and thus there is no need to appeal to irony when he makes such avowals of not-knowing. In the second half of this essay I will also suggest that the knowledge to which Socrates appeals is not an “ironic” appeal to human knowledge, as various scholars have argued, but is a sincere appeal to divine knowledge, i.e. immediate wisdom, which all human beings possess and rely on in their daily lives. In other words, Socratic knowing is a kind of enigmatic knowing which must be understood as a pre-theoretical, unexamined or innate wisdom. For Socrates all individuals “possess” such wisdom but in order to do the work that is “properly” human, i.e. the work allowing for virtue, one must enigmatically marry this “knowledge” with recognized ignorance.


1988 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Leftow

The claim that God is eternal is a standard feature of late–classical and mediaeval philosophical theology. It is prominent in discussions of the relation of God's foreknowledge to human freedom, and its consequences pervade traditional accounts of other kinds of divine knowledge, of God's will, and of God's relation to the world. So an examination of the concept of eternity promises to repay our efforts with a better understanding of the history of philosophical theology and with insight into the concept of God. Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzmann's ‘Eternity’ is a forceful, sophisticated presentation and defence of the notion of eternity. Our treatment of eternity will focus on two of Stump and Kretzmann's claims. First, Stump and Kretzmann contend that eternity isa kind of ‘atemporal duration’. We will see that while this is true, it is only part of the story. Second, Stump and Kretzmann claim to provide a viable account of how the existence of an eternal being can be simultaneous with some temporal event. We will see that and why they have not done so.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. 130-141
Author(s):  
Muhammad Hedayatul Islam

Kamal Hassan, fondly known as Prof. Kamal is a symbolic academician in a well-versed personality of virtue, adab (good manners), and hikmah (wisdom). He has been accredited as one of the intellectual leaders of Madarasah al-Wasatiyah or movement of moderation and ideologue of Islamization of knowledge in the contemporary Malay world. He is also one of the leading figures in the area of contemporary Islamic thought and Malay civilization. His literature is vocal on the issue of Islam and modernity, Wasatiyah or Islamic moderation, Islamicization of human knowledge, Integrated Islamic education, secularism and secular education, the relationship between East and West, human rights and civil society. His metaphysical views have been often quoted in the literature of Muslim intellectuals and activists in Southeast Asia. Moreover, his philosophical thought of a justly balanced approach of Wasatiyah is also worth mention. The noteworthy highlights in his literature and speech promote Muslim leaders and scholars to examine: what collective moral responsibility they have, as a moderate nation or Ummah Wasat, to build a better world and a better nation—Khaira Ummah. There were many reasons for the intellectual decline of Muslims and the Muslim world. One of the reasons by moving away from the moderate and comprehensive understanding of the Qur’an. There is undoubtedly an urgent need to retract the philosophy of Ummah Wasat based on divine knowledge rooted in humanistic and societal life. Hence, Kamal Hassan fetched the thoughts in his lectures, articles, and books to relevantize the philosophy of moderation in Islam. Keywords: Wasatiyah, Moderation, Justly Balanced Path, Islamization of Knowledge, Kamal Hassan and Malay World.  


Author(s):  
MARIA ROSA ANTOGNAZZA

This chapter comments on Robert Adams’ chapter on the concept of the priority of the perfect in continental rationalists’ philosophical theology. It identifies the point of the top-down strategy project as a way of establishing that God’s properties are the ontological grounding of the properties of finite things, that that God is the root or ground of all reality, and a conclusion is not available from a bottom-up approach. It considers whether the theologically more promising top-down strategy does not simply beg a crucial question by assuming that we can have some conception of the perfect that is independent of, or prior to, a conception of the imperfect.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Jean-Baptiste Brenet

AbstractThis article deals with the divine knowledge of particulars in Averroes’ Tahāfut al-tahāfut and Ḍamīma. It examines how the concept of relation, generally neglected, is at the heart of the dispute between Avicenna, al-Ġazālī, and the Commentator. In al-Ġazālī’s eyes, Avicenna's misconception of divine knowledge “in a universal way” is based on a misuse of relation in the case of God's knowledge. If particulars change and God does not, his knowledge of particulars, insofar as it undergoes change, can be considered a pure relation without ontological consequences. Averroes contests both al-Ġazālī’s criticism and his proposal, despite the fact that, for different reasons involving the coming-to-be of human knowledge, he too employs the notion of pure relation in his Long Commentary on the Physics.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Jackson ◽  
Justin Mooney

Abstract Although much has been written about divine knowledge, and some on divine beliefs, virtually nothing has been written about divine credences. In this article we comparatively assess four views on divine credences: (1) God has only beliefs, not credences; (2) God has both beliefs and credences; (3) God has only credences, not beliefs; and (4) God has neither credences nor beliefs, only knowledge. We weigh the costs and benefits of these four views and draw connections to current discussions in philosophical theology.


Author(s):  
Timothy Pawl

This chapter presents the final extension to be considered in this book. That extension is the thesis that Christ, via his human intellect, knew all things past, present, and future. The chapter begins by providing evidence that Aquinas believed that Christ had such robust knowledge. It goes on to provide evidence that other traditional thinkers and Christian groups believed similarly. The chapter next asks the question of foreknowledge and creaturely freedom, but in this case with respect to Christ’s human knowledge, not God’s divine knowledge. That is, if the extension discussed in this chapter is true, then Christ, 2,000 years ago, knew everything you would be doing right now. But then, the question arises, how could you be free in your actions. This chapter presents a Thomistic response to the argument for the inconsistency of Conciliar Christology with this extension concerning Christ’s human knowledge.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document