The Metaphysics of John Duns Scotus :: Philosophy Philosophical Papers

The Metaphysics of John Duns Scotus The ecclesiastical swearing of Aristoteleanism and Arabian doctrine in 1277, which included some of the theses of Thomas Aquinas, had a profound influence on the subsequent development of medieval philosophy. Of course, electrical resistance to Greco-Arabian philosophy was nonhing new in the 13th century. Its opening decades had seen the saucily translated work of Aristotle and Averroes forbidden yet their vogue spread, and in the long time that followed a reconciliation was attempted, with varied success, between Christian dogma and the new learning. The heresy of Latin Averroism as the end of the century only confirmed the suspicion of the conservative theologians that any Christian who accepted the credentials of Aristoteleanism essential arrive at conclusions contrary to faith. The great condemnation of 1277 expressed their renewed reaction to Aristotle and left wing an even deeper impression on subsequent scholars of the inadequacy of ph ilosophy and sensitive human reason, in the name of theology. If, as had been claimed, the 14th century is a period of criticism, it is above all, a period of criticism, in the name of theology, of philosophy and the pretensions of pure reason. The attitude of Duns Scotus (1266-1308) of the Franciscan Order, towards Aristotle and philosophy in general is seen in his Object of Human Knowledge. According to Aristotle, the human intellect is naturally cancelled towards sensible things from the way is must draw all its acquaintance by way of sensation and abstraction. As a consequence, the proper object of knowledge is the essence of a material thing. Now, Duns Scotus was willing to agree that Aristotle correctly expound our present way of knowing, but he did contest that he had tell the last word on the subject and that he had sufficiently explained what is in full right the object of our knowledge. Ignorant of revelation, Aristotle did not realise that gay is now in a fallen st ate and that he was describing the knowledge, not of an integral Man, but one whose mode of knowing was radically change by original sin. Ignorance of this fact is understandable in Aristotle, but it must have seemed inexcusable in a Christian theologian same(p) Thomas Aquinas. The Christian, Scotus argues, cannot take Mans state as his natural one, nor, as a consequence, the present servitude of his intellect to the senses and sensible things as natural to him. We know from Revelation that Man is destined to see God face-to-face.