home > Astrology | Feng Shui | Numerology > Philosophy of John Duns cattle. Duns cattle and his philosophy Duissko

Philosophy of John Duns cattle. Duns cattle and his philosophy Duissko

Blissful John Duns Scott(English Johannes Duns Scotus, in the UK also John Duns Scotus - John Duns Scotus, more Latinized - Ioannes Duns Scotus; 1266, Duns, Scotland - November 8, 1308, Cologne) - Scottish theologian, philosopher, scholastic and Franciscan.

Along with Thomas Aquinas and W. Ockham, Duns Scotus is generally regarded as the most important philosopher-theologian of the High Middle Ages. He had a significant influence on ecclesiastical and secular thought. Among the doctrines that made Scott famous are such as: "unambiguity of being", where existence is the most abstract concept applicable to everything that exists; formal difference - a way of distinguishing different aspects of the same thing; the idea of concreteness - a property inherent in each individual and endowing it with individuality. Scott also developed a set of arguments for the existence of God and arguments for the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary.

According to V. S. Solovyov, he is the last and most original representative of the golden age medieval scholasticism and in some respects a harbinger of a different worldview. Received the nickname Doctor subtilis ("Doctor thin") for penetrating, subtle way of thinking.

Life

Information about the life of Duns Scotus is half legendary.

Scott was born, in all likelihood, in Duns (southern Scotland); according to other assumptions - in Northumberland or Ireland. The date of birth is also probably unknown - approximately in 1260-1274.

It is known for sure that he taught theology first at Oxford and then in Paris. Here, in Paris, in 1305 he defended his doctoral thesis, in which he defended (against the Dominican Thomists) the original Immaculateness of the Virgin Mary. According to legend, in this dispute a miracle happened in favor of Scott: a marble statue of the Virgin nodded her head approvingly to him. It is historically certain that the Parisian faculty recognized his arguments as so convincing that at the same time it decided to continue to require from all those seeking an academic degree an oath confession of faith in the Immaculate Conception (five and a half centuries before the proclamation of this dogma by Pope Pius IX). Summoned to Cologne on church business, Duns Scotus died there of a stroke, believed to have been in 1308.

According to legend, in his early youth, Duns Scotus seemed extremely stupid and only after a mysterious vision did he begin to reveal his rich spiritual powers. In addition to theology and philosophy, he acquired extensive knowledge in linguistics, mathematics, optics and astrology.

belief system

Duns Scotus became the privileged teacher of the order for the Franciscans (a similar status had Thomas Aquinas for the Dominicans). At the same time, however, it is not proven that he himself was from the monks of Francis of Assisi, but the Franciscans were committed to the teachings of Scotus due to the essential opposition of this teaching to Thomism.

Duns Scotus was, as far as the general limits of the scholastic worldview allowed, an empiricist and individualist, firm in religious and practical principles and a skeptic of purely speculative truths. He did not possess and did not consider it possible to possess a coherent and comprehensive system of theological and philosophical knowledge, in which particular truths would be derived a priori from the general principles of reason. From his point of view, everything real is known only empirically, through its action, tested by the cognizer. External things act on us in sensory perception, and our knowledge of the reality of its content depends on the object, and not on the subject; on the other hand, it cannot entirely depend on the object, because in this case, the simple perception of the object or its presence in our consciousness would already constitute perfect knowledge, while we see that the perfection of knowledge is achieved only by the efforts of the mind directed to the object. Our mind is not a bearer of ready-made ideas or a passive "blank slate" - it is the potency of conceivable forms (Species intelligibilis), through which it transforms single data of sensory perception into general knowledge.

That which is thus known or conceived by the mind in things, supersensible data, has no real existence apart from individual things; also, it is not only our subjective thought, but expresses the formal properties or differences inherent in objects. Since differences in themselves, without a discriminating mind, are unthinkable, the objective, independent of our mind, existence of these formal properties in things is possible only insofar as they are initially distinguished by another mind - the divine.

DUNS SKOT John (Ioannes Duns Scotus) (c. 1266, Duns, Scotland - November 8, 1308, Cologne) - Franciscan theologian, philosopher, the largest representative of the medieval conceptualism ; "the thinnest doctor" (doctor subtilis). He taught at Oxford, Paris, Cologne. Major works - comments on the "Sentences" Peter Lombard : the Oxford commentary, known as Ordinatio (in other editions - Commentaria Oxoniensia, Opus Oxoniense), and the Parisian - Reportata Parisiensia.

Remaining faithful to the tradition of Augustinianism, Duns Scotus at the same time reforms it. He was the first of the Franciscan theologians to renounce the doctrine Augustine about the need for special divine insight to achieve true knowledge, allowing, after Aristotle , firstly, that the human mind has the ability to acquire reliable knowledge about things that exist, and secondly, that all knowledge is ultimately based on the data of sensory perception. Although the ultimate goal of knowledge is the comprehension of divine being, however, a direct contemplation of the infinite being of God is not available to a person in his current state. He knows about the divine being only what he can infer, starting from the contemplation of created things.

But it is not things as such, not the essences of finite things that are the own object of the human intellect: if the ability of intellect were initially limited to the realm of material things, the knowledge of God would become impossible. In sensually perceived things, the mind distinguishes, along with the characteristics that are characteristic only of finite things, which are fixed in Aristotelian categories, transcendentals - aspects of a reality that transcends the world of material things, since they can take place outside of it. This is, first of all, being, as well as the attributes of being, either coinciding in scope with the concept of being: one, true, good, or “disjunctive attributes” such as “infinite or finite”, “necessary or accidental”, “to be a cause or causally conditioned” and etc., dividing the sphere of being as a whole into two subregions.

It is being, according to Duns Scotus, that is the own object of the human intellect, since it is unambiguous, i.e. in the same sense it is applicable both to the Creator and to creatures, and therefore, although man abstracts it from the consideration of material things, it also leads to the knowledge of God, i.e. to the realization of the desire inherent in human nature. Being as such is the subject of philosophy, infinite being is theology, and the finite being of material things is physics.

Like Thomas Aquinas , Duns Scotus in his evidence relies on the Aristotelian doctrine of causes. The proofs of the existence of God for both begin with the statement of the fact that there is something random in the world that may or may not exist. Since the existence of random things is not necessary, it is derivative, i.e. due to the First Cause, which has the necessary existence, Thomas concludes. Duns Scotus considers his argument insufficient: it is impossible, starting from the accidental, to come to conclusions that have the status of necessary truths. In order for the above reasoning to acquire evidentiary force, one should begin with the necessary premises. This can be done, because in any random fact there is something non-random, an essential characteristic that cannot be absent from what is random, namely, that it is possible. The assertion of the possibility of actually existing finite things is necessary. The actual existence of that which has only a possible existence necessarily presupposes the existence of a more perfect (necessary) existence, since a possible existence becomes actual if it is conditioned by that to which existence is inherent in its very nature. God, while possessing the necessary being, is at the same time the source of all possibilities. Since the possibilities of all finite things and events coexist in God, he is infinite.

Really exist, according to Duns Scotus, only individuals; forms and essences (“whatnesses” of things) also exist, but not really, but as objects of the Divine intellect. These entities are "nature" which in themselves are neither general nor particular, but precede the existence of both the general and the particular. If the nature of the horse, argues Duns Scotus, were single, there would be only one horse, if it were universal, there would be no separate horses, since the individual cannot be derived from the general, and vice versa, from the individual - the general. The existence of individual things is possible due to the addition to the essence-nature of a special individualizing feature - "thisness".

Matter cannot serve as the beginning of individualization and differentiation of concrete things from each other, since it itself is indefinite and indistinguishable. The individual is characterized by a unity more perfect than the unity of the species (general nature), because it excludes division into parts. The transition from the unity of species to the unity of the individual presupposes the addition of some inner perfection. "Thisness", being added to the view, as it were, compresses it; species (general nature) loses its divisibility due to “thisness”. In conjunction with "thisness", the general nature ceases to be common to all individuals and turns into a characteristic of this particular individual. The addition of "thisness" means a change in the mode of existence of the species: it receives a real existence.

Interpreting the act of creation as a transition from the reduced existence of universals as objects of divine thinking to the real existence of individuals, Duns Scotus for the first time, in line with the Platonic-Aristotelian philosophical tradition, gives the individual the status of a fundamental ontological unit. An individual, according to the teachings of Duns Scotus, has a higher existential perfection than the perfection of a specific or generic essence. The affirmation of the value of the individual led to the affirmation of the value of the human person, which corresponded to the spirit of the Christian doctrine. This was precisely the main meaning of the doctrine of "thisness".

To solve one of the most important and most difficult problems of scholastic theology and philosophy: how does the presence of non-identical attributes of God - goodness, omnipotence, foresight, etc. - is compatible with the statement about the absolute simplicity and unity of God, i.e. with the absence of any plurality in it, Duns Scotus introduces the concept of formal difference. Objects are formally different if they correspond to different (non-identical) concepts, but at the same time they are not only mental objects, i.e. if their difference is due to the thing itself. In contrast to really different objects that exist separately from each other in the form of different things, the formal difference of objects does not imply their real existence: they are different without being different things (actually existing substances). Therefore, the formal distinction of the Divine attributes does not contradict the real unity of the Divine substance. The concept of formal difference is used by Duns Scotus when considering also the problem of the difference between Persons in the Trinity and for distinguishing will and reason as abilities of the soul.

The theory of knowledge of Duns Scotus is characterized by a sharp opposition between intuitive and abstract knowledge. The object of intuitive knowledge is the individual, perceived as existing, the object of the abstract is “whatness”, or the essence of a thing. Only intuitive knowledge makes it possible to directly come into contact with something that exists, i.e. with being. The human intellect, although by nature capable of intuitive knowledge, in its present state is limited mainly to the sphere of abstract knowledge. Grasping the common nature inherent in individuals of the same species, the intellect abstracts it from individuals, turning it into a universal ( general concept). Directly, without resorting to the help of intelligible species, the intellect can contact what really exists only in one case: by knowing the acts performed by itself. Knowledge about these acts, expressed in statements like “I doubt this and that”, “I think about this”, is absolutely reliable. The participation of the intellect (along with the sense organs) in the cognition of things in the external world ensures the achievement of reliable knowledge already at the stage of sensory perception.

Having contrasted, following Avicenna (Ibn Sina), the necessary existence of God with the random existence of finite things, Duns Scotus had to explain how these types of being are interconnected. He could not agree with Avicenna that the world of finite things emanate from the necessary being with necessity: God, according to Christian doctrine, creates the world freely; in the act of creation he is not compelled by any necessity. In his conception of creation, Duns Scotus proceeds from the same premise as other scholastics: God, before giving existence to things, has perfect knowledge of their essence. But if the ideas of things are rooted in the divine essence itself, as his predecessors believed, then, Duns Scotus points out, the divine intellect in the act of knowing would be determined by the pre-existing essences of things. In reality, the divine intellect is primary in relation to the essences of things, since, knowing them, it simultaneously produces them. Therefore, the necessity inherent in the essences of things - each essence is characterized by a certain set of signs, and these signs must necessarily be present in it - is not an external necessity with which divine knowledge must conform; necessity is not a property of entities in themselves, but is communicated to them in the act of cognition and testifies to the perfection of the divine mind.

God creates not only the essence of things, but also really existing things. The existence of things is accidental, not necessarily inherent in them, since the only reason for their existence is the will (desire) of God: “It acts randomly in relation to any object, so that it can desire the opposite of it. This is true not only when the will is considered ... simply as the will that precedes its act, but also when it is considered in the act of volition itself” (Op. Oxon., I, d. 39, q. unica, n. 22). This explains the radical contingency of created things. In the act of creation, God assigned to each thing its nature: fire - the ability to heat, air - to be lighter than earth, etc. But since the divine will cannot be bound by any particular object, it is quite possible for fire to be cold, etc., and for the whole universe to be governed by other laws. The free will of God, however, is not pure arbitrariness. The perfection of the divine will is that it can only act in accordance with the divine intellect. Therefore, as Duns Scotus states, "God desires in the highest degree of intelligence." He desires essences as they should be, and chooses compatible essences among those that must come into existence in the act of creation. God is incapable of willing the meaningless. He is an infinitely wise architect who knows his own creation in every detail. The existence and non-existence of random things depends entirely on the free will of God, but when God wills and creates, He always creates wisely and purposefully. The assertion of the superiority of the will over the intellect is a hallmark of the ethics of Duns Scotus. He does not deny the fact that a person must know the object, desire it, but why, he asks, is this object chosen as the object of knowledge? Because we want to know it. The will governs the intellect, directing it to the knowledge of this or that object. Duns Scotus does not agree with Thomas Aquinas that the will necessarily aspires to the Highest Good, and if the human intellect were able to discern the Good in itself, our will would immediately cling to it and thereby achieve the most perfect freedom. Will, Duns Scotus argues, is the only ability that is not determined by anything - neither by its object, nor by the natural inclinations of a person. For Duns Scotus, the main assumption from which his predecessors proceeded when formulating their ethical doctrines is unacceptable, namely, that the basis of all moral virtues is the natural desire of every thing to achieve the degree of perfection that it can achieve, having its own form. Love for God and for one's neighbor, in such doctrines, turns out to be the result of a more fundamental desire of man to achieve his own perfection. Based on input Anselm of Canterbury the distinction between a person's natural inclination to act for his own benefit and the desire for justice, Duns Scotus interprets free will as freedom from necessity, forcing a person to seek, first of all, his own good; freedom is expressed in the ability to love goodness for the sake of goodness itself, in the ability to selflessly love God and other people.

Compositions:

1. Opera omnia, ed. L. Vives, 26 vol. P., 1891–95;

2. Opera omnia, ed. C.Balic etc. Vatican, 1950;

3. God and Creatures: The Quodlibetal Questions, ed. and transl. F. Alluntis and A. Wolter, 1975.

Literature:

1. Gilson A. Jean Duns Scot: Introduction à ses positions fondamentales. P., 1952;

2. Messner R. Schauendes und begriffliches Erkennen nach Duns Scotus. Freiburg im B., 1942;

3. Bettoni E. L "ascesa a Dio in Duns Scotus. Mil., 1943;

4. Grajewski M. The Formal Distinction of Duns Scotus. Wash., 1944;

5. Wolter A. The Transcendentals and Their Function ih the Metaphysics of Duns Scotus. N.Y., 1946;

6. Vier P.C. Evidence and its Function according to John Duns Scotus. N.Y., 1951;

7. Owens J. Common Nature: A Point of Comparison Between Thomistic and Scotistic Metaphysics. - "Mediaeval Studies", 19 (1957);

8. Hoeres W. Der Wille als reine Vollkommenheit nach Duns Scotus. Munch., 1962;

9. Stadter E. Psychologie und Metaphysik der menschlichen Freiheit. Die ideengeschichtliche Entwicklung zwischen Bonaventura und Duns Scotus. Munch., 1971.

Brief biography of the philosopher

Definition 1

John Duns Scott ($1266 - $1308) Scottish scholastic, theologian, philosopher, monk of the Franciscan order, the last prominent representative of his era.

His activities are attributed to the period of the so-called High Middle Ages , along with the activities of Thomas Aquinas and William of Ockham. His impact on the state and the church was very significant and strong.

Theology lecturer at Oxford and Paris. For the Franciscan order, Duns Scotus was one of the most privileged teachers, just like Thomas Aquinas for the Dominican order.

The whole philosophy of Duns Scotus comes down to the study of being as such. But the human mind can only assume about being that it is possible to abstract from sensory data. He does not have access to the contemplation of being, without specific definitions. He sees a being that belongs to finite things, that is, created things.

Philosophy begins with an abstract understanding of being, which is applied both to the Creator and to creation, on the basis of which it proves the existence of God as an infinite being.

In contrast to finite things that exist by chance, derivatively, due to a certain cause, God, as an infinite being, is endowed with a necessary existence, he is the First cause for finite things.

His famous treatises include:

The Doctrine of the Unambiguity of Being
Doctrine of formal distinction
The Doctrine of Concreteness

His works also include a system of arguments in favor of the existence of God and the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary.

Theology of Duns Scotus

In the traditions of scholasticism of the Middle Ages, he shared reason and faith, only his position was particularly harsh. Duns Scotus was an ardent opponent of the subordinate relationship of science to theology. He considered theology, theology not as a science, as speculative and theoretical, but rather as something that is capable of healing the spirit. With such an impressive body of knowledge, it could become comprehensive.

Theology is based on faith and has as its subject the Will of God, not his nature. God can be known through empirical experience, through the sensations of his actions, a person has theoretical knowledge of him based only on the need for spiritual peace. God is not known to us, but only perceived in actions, in the physical world and in religious revelation. Consequently, Duns Scotus did not adhere to the doctrine of the ontological proof of Divine existence, referring only to the cosmological and ontological.

Along with the study of the world and life, and their negative and positive properties, the mind cognizes God as the absolute and perfect first cause, which acts expediently. We cannot know the individual divine reality, but have only a vague assumption about it. We do not have the definitions of God that are spoken of in Christian teachings; they cannot be proved by reason. It is also impossible to talk about the self-evidence of God, we submit to his authority. But all these characteristics, which are given in revelation, then interact with the mind and become its subject, as a result of which a system of knowledge about divine things is built.

Cosmology of Duns Scotus

Remark 1

Duns Scotus believed that the basis of the world is a single and indefinite substance or matter, and perfection - as a form that completely owns matter. Thus, the universe, according to Duns Scotus, is a slow ascent from the whole to the particular, individual, from the indefinite to the definite, from imperfection to perfection. The merit of Duns Scotus lies in the representation of the universe as an independent whole.

His philosophy does not fit into the framework of medieval scholasticism and goes far ahead. She takes the position of late scholasticism, the forerunner of the philosophy of the Renaissance.

His teachings include:

Philosophy is not the servant of theology
Realism in the understanding of substance and spiritual essence
Reasonable empiricism

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http:// www. all best. en/

Philosophy of John Duns Scotus

John Duns Scotus (Duns Scotus, Duns Scotus), (1265 - 1308) - English Franciscan, the last and most original representative of the golden age of medieval scholasticism and in some respects a harbinger of a different worldview.

He taught theology at Oxford and Paris. According to philosophical views, he was a pure indeterminist and recognized the primacy of the will over the mind both in man and in God; attached great importance to individuality, individual freedom, which sharply differed from the Dominican Thomas Aquinas, an advocate of authority to the detriment of private will.

The distribution of philosophy over the centuries is done solely for the purpose of convenience and habit. In fact, philosophy has its own internal calendar, but setting it own dates already in itself a research task and not a simple one, especially since philosophy's own calendar must somehow be correlated with the usual calendar. We will not solve this problem, we will not even set it for ourselves, we will simply note that the calendar of philosophy does not completely coincide with the generally accepted historical one. Yes, we also note, we can’t resist that the golden age of scholasticism, which is usually dated to the 13th century, actually begins with Albert the Great, from 20 years. 13th century and ends around the middle of the 14th century - the death of Ockham. The discrepancy between calendars is, in general, a very common thing, and we have met more than once and will still meet with this situation.

The most ripe fruits of scholasticism grew on its tree at the very end of the 13th and the first half of the 14th century, at the same time, forces capable of destroying scholasticism ripened on other branches of this tree. They were just biding their time, and their hour came a little later.

The time will come to talk about these forces, but for now we will try the most ripe fruits of scholasticism, already a little touched by corruption and decay.

One of the most notable and famous scholastics of the 14th century is John Duns Scotus, a Scot by nationality who lived only about 40 years or a little more. But he is considered almost a Franciscan opponent of Thomas Aquinas. The opponent, however, said too strongly. Indeed, there was a difference of opinion between the more romantically and mystically inclined Franciscans and the strict and dogmatic Dominicans. But this difference is not so significant, the difference in the interpretation of some dogmas, the struggle of both for influence and power in catholic church. We remember that in the Middle Ages it was customary to mark outstanding philosophers and theologians with some title: angelic doctor, universal doctor, etc. So Duns Scott got the name "thin doctor" for his love of complex logical exercises, which, it seems, he joined during his years of study at Oxford and Paris. His connection with the Franciscans was almost related - the uncle of the future theologian and philosopher was the vicar general of Scotland, that is, the head of the Scottish branch of the order. In early youth, they say, John gave the impression of a dumb (to put it mildly) guy, but again they say that he had a vision, after which he began to surprise everyone with success in the sciences. After defending his dissertation in Paris, Duns Scot began a teaching career, which, however, lasted only two years. The dissertation defense was also accompanied by mysterious events: The topic of his dissertation was the original purity of the Virgin Mary. Regarding this dogma, there are generally disputes in theology: whether Mary was conceived immaculately or was born in the usual way, but original sin did not pass to her, and besides, she was a virgin who gave birth to Christ. Catholics accepted the dogma of original purity only in the 19th century, but Duns Scotus insisted on the purity of Mary as early as the beginning of the 14th century, 500 years earlier. So, there is a legend that during the defense of the dissertation, the statue of the Virgin nodded approvingly to the dissertation student. So it was or not, but something else is known for certain. The Faculty of Theology of Paris not only awarded a degree to the applicant, but also decreed that all who sought a degree in that faculty should swear to it. that Mary is immaculate from the very beginning (and this, we remind ourselves once again, more than 500 years before the official adoption of this dogma).

The teaching career of Duns Scotus, as we have already said, did not last long. In 1307 or 1308 he was summoned to Cologne on some ecclesiastical business and died there suddenly of a stroke.

The most striking event in the life of Duns Scotus was his participation in the dispute between Pope Boniface VIII and the French King Philip IV the Handsome of the Capetian family (Well, male beauty is a moot point, but in some images King Philip looks quite impressive). Yes, and the chroniclers describe the king as a man who possessed exquisite beauty, a sharp mind, an iron will and extraordinary dispassion. Pope Boniface was also a remarkable man, at least in his ambitions. He was the last pope who insisted on the supremacy of the pope in matters not only ecclesiastical, but also political.

Initially, Pope Boniface was completely delighted with the king, paying tribute to his piety and intelligence. But the "romance" of the papacy and the French crown did not last long. The military claims of the ambitious Philip demanded expenses, the king introduced a new tax "on war", which he extended to the clergy. Thus, Philip IV emphasized that from now on the previously required consent of Rome to the taxation of the clergy and church lands was canceled. Pope Boniface VIII, in a special bull "Clericis laicos", sharply opposed the measures of Philip IV, forbade the taxation of the clergy without the permission of the curia, canceled all the concessions made by his predecessors in this matter and threatened with ecclesiastical punishment those who would collect or pay taxes not authorized by the pope. In response, the king forbade the export of gold, silver and all kinds of jewelry abroad from France, and Boniface lost the opportunity to receive funds from France.

Boniface had to look for new sources of income, and he found them: he introduced the years of jubilee christian church starting from 1300. It was assumed that anniversaries would be celebrated every hundred years, but then the dates were reduced. The pilgrims who flocked to Rome for jubilees did not come there empty-handed. and if we consider that among the pilgrims there were many crusaders who wanted to be cleansed of sins, then it is clear that the papal treasury did not remain in the loser.

But Philip continued to annoy the pope. Information came to Rome that Philip imposes heavy taxes on the clergy and generally behaves as if there is no pope in the world. "The disputes continued, having received a theological shade appropriate to the time. In the next message of the pope, the unconditional priority of papal authority over royal power was proved. In a quarrel, the pope did not cared about diplomatic expressions. The king was compared to a street boy who should be flogged with vines, the French were called dogs. Philip had to endure, especially since he had just been defeated by the English, but did not tolerate the ambitious monarch for long. Philip accused Boniface of usurping papal power, declared him a monster, a criminal and a heretic. The pope in response excommunicated the king from the church, and the king sent his ambassador to Rome, where he incited several people to drive the pope from the throne. Morals were simple, the guards did not work well, so the conspirators broke into the papal palace, began to insult and scold far from young man, threatened that they would put him in chains and force him to abdicate. Papa was in the hands of the conspirators for three days, from the humiliations he had endured, he fell into a disorder of consciousness and died. This was in 1303. Then a separate story of Philip the Handsome begins, connected with the Knights Templar, but this is not our story yet. As for the popes, the famous "Avignon captivity" of the papal throne began a little later. Yes, it should also be noted that Dante Alighieri, who placed Boniface a in hell, was a fierce opponent of Pope Boniface. god knowledge being philosopher

So in the dispute of kings (in the dispute participated and English king, but not so actively) with dad Duns Scott was, of course, on the side of the pope. For this reason, he was not only persecuted in France, but his position was unenviable. Due to the fact that he supported the pope, he was forced to leave Paris in the middle of the school year, after the death of Boniface he returned to Paris, but then new complications with royal power awaited him. Not many events in the life of a 40-year-old philosopher happened, there is nothing special to talk about. Much more significant is his spiritual history of his ideas, his philosophy.

After Scott's death, his disciples began to publish his writings and created an unimaginable confusion. They simply - simply took lecture notes, introduced into the main text what Scott himself crossed out, and also attributed to Scott several forged works that existed until the middle of the twentieth century as belonging to the British philosopher. A more or less reliable collection of Scott's works was published in the 1950s. In Russian in 2001, some of the works of Duns Scott were published with a preface by a very good specialist in the history of Medieval philosophy - Gennady Mayorov. The collection contains "rational theology", "God-revealed theology", "Epistemology and metaphysics", "The doctrine of man and society". Dunsian comments on the fourth book of the master of maxims have also been translated. Apparently, these are comments on the "Sentences" of Peter Lombard.

So, it's time to start presenting the ideas of Duns Scotus. We will begin with epistemological problems, with how Scotus imagines the process of cognition. He seems to be in solidarity with Aristotle in that. that our knowledge has its source as sensations, and the mind is the ability to organize sensations, but the mind does not have its own content - it is an instrument. He has to reject the idea of his fellow Franciscans about divine illumination, about that. that God puts his ideas into the human mind. But what exactly are the ideas? Our ideas in the process of cognition change - what ideas does God put in us? Or is he constantly investing? But is it then possible to speak of man's own cognitive efforts? Rejecting the idea of illumination, Duns Scotus encroaches, one might say, on the sacred: on the recognized theory of Augustine the Blessed. This is already too much, and he does not directly criticize Augustine. The arrows of his criticism are directed against the Augustinian Henry of Ghent, whom he accuses of misunderstanding Augustine. Indeed, there are grounds for such accusations. If we recall that Augustine’s doctrine of divine illumination is not entirely clear: either God puts understanding into the human soul in order to comprehend eternal divine truths, or any and any - Augustine can be understood in different ways in this case. In addition, Henry of Ghent worries Duns Scotus very little, he needs him to state his understanding of the knowledge of truth in the traditional polemical manner for the Middle Ages. Eternal truths, from the point of view of Scotus, are logically analytical judgments, and the mind does not need any kind of illumination in order to "reach them." Let us remind ourselves that such judgments are recognized as analytical, the predicate of which does not contain anything new in comparison with the subject and does not require the involvement of additional information. For example: A bachelor is an unmarried person, a Predator is a carnivorous creature. The whole is greater than its part. Etc. If the area of knowledge operates with eternal truths or refers to them, then the subject of eternal truths is God, therefore, these truths themselves cannot add anything new to knowledge. What is illumination or "illumination" for? What to illuminate? Everything can be understood without any "insights", everything is contained initially in the divine mind, that is, in the divine word proclaimed to people in Holy Scripture. The subject is understandable. But this is what is the object of eternal truths, that is, what they are about - these eternal truths. Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus diverge here. For Duns Scotus there is an ontological difference between philosophy and theology. The subject of theology is God as such. The subject of philosophy is being as such. Therefore, philosophy cannot talk about God, it simply does not reach him, but it can reach the understanding of being as such, which is what philosophy (metaphysics) does.

As an Aristotelian, Thomas is interested in the existence of beings, that is, the existence of real things. Dunsa Scotus is not interested in the existence of things. he is interested in the being of beings as such, that is, as concepts. In this regard, Duns Scotus can be considered Hegel's predecessor in the "Science of Logic", where Hegel explores the existence of the spirit not in the sense of the existence of the spirit (this is what the "Phenomenology of the Spirit" is dedicated to, but in the sense of the spirit's own logic. If we establish the existent, then we can explore its signs and properties (also logical). The attributes of beings are as follows. The first group - the one, true and good - is, as we would say, the total characteristics of beings. The second group - separating attributes. They are divided into pairs: finite-infinite; necessary-random. Duns argues that any concrete being can be either one or the other, but not the third or fourth.Despite, however, as if the prohibition within metaphysics to talk about God, Duns Scotus does not pass over this issue in silence. It is clear the question of God for metaphysics is quite traditional, especially since, according to Scot, the best philosopher is one who, in addition to philosophical occupation, also deals with theology.He considered Avicenna as an example of such an ideal combination. Yes, and Duns Scotus himself was still more a theologian than a "pure" philosopher, thinking about the world as if there is no God and never was.

How can one interpret the existence of God in the author's scheme. The concept of God, according to Scot, should be derived from the premise of being (about being) - exactly as it will be later with Hegel. If we assume that the existent is the object of the human mind in its entirety, then there are no obstacles to the knowledge of God. The only thing that can interfere and this hindrance is tragic - the human mind is burdened with sensuality, it is in the captivity of sensuality and there is no way to escape from this captivity. Hence the notion that God is unknowable. Of course, it is unknowable to the mind, aimed at studying the material world, at sense cognition. This program is not suitable for knowing God, you need to download a new one. essence new program is also understandable. If we want to UNDERSTAND what God is, then we must use CONCEPTS. That is, to begin with, it would be nice to understand what is at stake. We must have an understanding of God. Christians talk a lot about God, attributing to him different properties, but these are separate properties, only one single concept is necessary, but precise and definite. By analogy - there is no need to describe the properties of some objects, you just need to name them exactly. And that's it. With God, however, the situation is not so simple, although Scott offers a concept that, in his opinion, is adequate to God. This is the concept of an actual infinite being. Why is this concept? Nothing can be called God. which would be less than the actual infinite being. But is there such a being? The proof of the existence of such a being is presented by Duns Scotus with a sophisticated logic of inference and may seem simply boring to a modern person, therefore we will not dwell on them. Moreover, this proof (it is stated in the comments to the "Sentences") is complex, confusing, contains a long series of arguments and can be traced with great difficulty. The funniest part is at the end of this proof. After spending a lot of words on proving God as an actually infinite being, Scott unexpectedly concludes that the Christian concept of God must be a matter of faith. Why does such a strange passage appear from the point of view of a rationally thinking logician. Scott remembers very simply. That God is not only an infinite being, an infinite being, he is also just and merciful. And this, says Scott, no philosopher can prove, because there are no such logical arguments. This is beyond pure logic. This must be accepted - then you are a Christian. Or not to accept - then you are a pagan or a heretic.

Passing from God to man, it can be noted that according to Scotus, the philosopher can prove that the human organism has a form, and this form is a rational and even rational soul. But this is not a special substance, as "that damned Averroes" thought, but did not understand what it was actually about. Scott followed Aristotle, who also considered the rational soul as a form that organizes the life of the body. The philosopher can prove the formality of the soul, but not its immortality, the philosopher does not have enough arguments. Therefore, the immortality of the soul cannot be the subject of philosophical (rational) consideration, it is the subject of faith. He simply does not find suitable arguments for such a proof in the history of philosophy.

A person has a property on which Duns Scotus resolutely insists - this is freedom. At the same time, it is interesting that he did not consider the mind to be free, the mind is limited by truth. If the mind reaches the truth, it does not need to be free, it is subject to the true law or regulation. Only the will can be free, it has no boundaries, the will can be suppressed, it can be subdued, but only externally. It is possible that the ratio of will and reason in human life will not cause much enthusiasm today, but this problem can be reformulated differently: what is more important for a person - the mind or the volitional and emotional side. It is amazing, but the purely rationalist and logician Scott prefers the second - the emotional and volitional sphere of human life. This is connected with the concept of love, which Scott, as a true Christian, puts above reason.

Reason, he believes, pagan philosophers. In particular, Aristotle preferred love. This is understandable, how could they know the true Christian love. It's not the case for a Christian - for him love is above everything and - therefore - reason. By love, he understands love for the good, and love is disinterested. It is clear that selfless love for the good is love for God, it is the measure of all love. The idea of selfless love for God-good obedience to him defines the ethics of Scotus. It hardly makes sense to deploy this ethics, it is not very attractive to modern man, moreover, its main idea is devoted to the question of why God must be loved and cannot be hated, Duns seeks and finds evidence of this in logic.

In general, Scott's attempt to create a systematic philosophy, somewhat alternative to the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas, cannot be called completely finished, but it seems that this did not bother the Franciscans. For them, the main thing was to have a philosopher ("their own"), who would be comparable to the great Thomas. They found such a philosopher in Duns Scotus. Indeed, the followers of Duns Scotus were predominantly theologians. Their names are not mentioned almost in the history of philosophy, they fall under the category of theology, and the topics discussed by students and followers still belong to theology: the uniqueness of God, the omnipresence of his secret presence in all things, the immortality of the soul, etc. Pupils are often repelled from the same source as Scott himself, from the Sentences of Peter Lombard. You can name Landolfo Caracciolo, Hugo from Castro Novo, Francesco from March. The success of Duns Scotus in his time is evidence that Thomas Aquinas was not the undisputed and sole authority among theologians, at least in his time. His doctrine was officially adopted by the Dominican order, he also took up its defense, interpretation, propaganda, but this does not mean that it was free from criticism, this does not mean that there were no other very large schools within theology and theological scholasticism.

Duns Scot tried and quite successfully to create an alternative doctrine. It is possible that this work would have succeeded him even better, if not for such an early death. Just something 42 years. The real ideological opponent of Duns Scott was not Thomas, about whom the stubborn Scot broke more than one critical spear. The real opponent was a supporter of the so-called. natural theology (the forerunner of natural philosophy) William of Ockham, in whose writings the end of scholasticism as a spent intellectual resource is already visible. This is evident in Duns Scotus, but the smell of smoldering scholasticism is masked by refined logic and theology. Infused with love for God. William of Ockham is the forerunner of another strategic line in the subsequent philosophy, which was destined long life and unconditional primacy until the middle of the 19th century. Ockham marks the dawn of scientific philosophy.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

...

Life

No one knows for sure when John Duns Scot was born, but historians are sure that he owes his last name to the city of Duns, located near the Scottish border with England. Like many compatriots, the philosopher received the nickname "Cattle", meaning "Scot". He was ordained to the priesthood on March 17, 1291. Given that the local priest ordained a group of others towards the end of 1290, it can be assumed that Duns Scotus was born in the first quarter of 1266 and became a churchman as soon as he reached the legal age. In his youth, the future philosopher and theologian joined the Franciscans, who sent him to Oxford around 1288. At the beginning of the fourteenth century, the thinker was still at Oxford, since between 1300 and 1301 he took part in the famous theological discussion - as soon as he finished reading the course of lectures on the "Sentences". However, he was not accepted to Oxford as a permanent teacher, as the local rector sent a promising figure to a prestigious one where he lectured on the Maxims for the second time.

Duns Scotus, whose philosophy has made an invaluable contribution to world culture, could not finish his studies in Paris due to the ongoing confrontation between Pope Boniface VIII and the French king Philip the Just. In June 1301, emissaries of the king interrogated every Franciscan in the French convention, separating royalists from papists. Those who supported the Vatican were asked to leave France within three days. Duns Scotus was a representative of the papists and therefore he was forced to leave the country, but the philosopher returned to Paris in the autumn of 1304, when Boniface died, and the new Pope Benedict XI took his place, who managed to find a common language with the king. It is not known for certain where Duns spent several years of forced exile; historians suggest that he returned to teach at Oxford. For some time, the famous figure lived and lectured in Cambridge, but the time frame for this period cannot be specified.

Scott completed his studies in Paris and received the status of master (head of the college) around the beginning of 1305. Over the next couple of years he held an extensive discussion on scholastic questions. The order then sent him to the Franciscan House of Learning in Cologne, where Duns lectured on scholasticism. In 1308 the philosopher died; November 8 is officially considered the date of his death.

The subject of metaphysics

The doctrine of the philosopher and theologian is inseparable from the beliefs and worldviews that dominated during the period of his life. The Middle Ages determines the views that John Duns Scotus propagated. Philosophy, which briefly describes his vision of the divine principle, as well as the teachings of the Islamic thinkers Avicenna and Ibn Rushd, is largely based on various provisions of the Aristotelian work "Metaphysics". The main concepts in this vein are "being", "God" and "matter". Avicenna and Ibn Rushd, who had an unprecedented impact on the development of Christian scholastic philosophy, have diametrically opposed views in this regard. Thus, Avicenna denies the assumption that God is the subject of metaphysics in view of the fact that no science can prove and affirm the existence of its own subject; at the same time, metaphysics is capable of demonstrating the existence of God. According to Avicenna, this science studies the essence of the being. Man is related in a certain way to God, matter and events, and this relation makes it possible to study the science of being, which would include in its subject matter God and individual substances, as well as matter and actions. Ibn Rushd ends up only partially agreeing with Avicenna, confirming that the study of being by metaphysics implies its study of various substances and, in particular, individual substances and God. Considering that physics, and not the nobler science of metaphysics, determines the existence of God, one can not prove the fact that the subject of metaphysics is God. John Duns Scotus, whose philosophy largely follows the path of knowledge of Avicenna, supports the idea that metaphysics studies beings, the highest of which, no doubt, is God; he is the only perfect being on whom all others depend. That is why God occupies the most important place in the system of metaphysics, which also includes the doctrine of transcendentals, reflecting the Aristotelian scheme of categories. Transcendentals are a being, the own qualities of a being ("single", "correct", "correct" - these are transcendental concepts, since they coexist with substance and denote one of the definitions of substance) and everything that is included in relative opposites ("final " and "infinite", "necessary" and "conditional"). However, Duns Scotus emphasized that any real substance that falls under the term "being" can be considered the subject of the science of metaphysics.

Universals

Medieval philosophers base all their writings on ontological systems of classification - in particular, those described in Aristotle's "Categories" - to demonstrate the key relationships between created beings and to provide for man. scientific knowledge about them. So, for example, the personalities Socrates and Plato belong to the species of human beings, which, in turn, belong to the genus of animals. Donkeys also belong to the genus of animals, but the difference in the form of the ability to think rationally distinguishes a person from other animals. The genus "animals" together with other groups of the corresponding order (for example, the genus "plants") belongs to the category of substances. These truths are not disputed by anyone. However, the listed genera and species remain a debatable issue. Do they exist in extramental reality or are they just concepts generated by the human mind? Do genera and species consist of individual beings, or should they be regarded as independent, relative terms? John Duns Scotus, whose philosophy is based on his personal idea of common natures, pays much attention to these scholastic questions. In particular, he claims that such common natures as "humanity" and "animalism" really exist (although their being is "less significant" than the being of individuals) and that they are common both in themselves and in reality.

Unique Theory

It is difficult to categorically accept the ideas that guided John Duns Scotus; quotations preserved in primary sources and abstracts demonstrate that certain aspects of reality (for example, genera and species) in his view have less than quantitative unity. Accordingly, the philosopher offers a whole set of arguments in favor of the conclusion that not all real unities are quantitative unities. In his strongest arguments he emphasizes that if the situation were just the opposite, then the whole real variety would be a number variety. However, any two quantitatively different things differ from each other equally. The result is that Socrates is as different from Plato as he is different from a geometric figure. In such a case, the human intellect is unable to detect anything in common between Socrates and Plato. It turns out that when applying the universal concept " human"to two persons, a person uses a simple fiction of his own mind. These absurd conclusions demonstrate that quantitative diversity is not the only one, but, since it is the greatest, it means that there is some less than quantitative variety and a corresponding less than quantitative, unity.

Another argument is that in the absence of an intelligence capable of cognitive thinking, the flames of a fire will still produce new flames. The formative fire and the formed flame will have a real unity of form - such a unity that proves that this case is an example of unambiguous causation. The two types of flame thus have an intellect-dependent common nature with a unity less than quantitative.

The problem of indifference

These problems are carefully studied by late scholasticism. Duns Scotus believed that common natures in themselves are not individuals, independent units, since their own unity is less than quantitative. At the same time, general natures are not universals either. Following Aristotle's assertions, Scotus agrees that the universal defines one out of many and refers to many. As a medieval thinker understands this idea, the universal F must be so indifferent that it can relate to all individual F in such a way that the universal and each of its individual elements are identical. In simple words, the universal F determines each individual F equally well. Scot agrees that in this sense no general nature can be a universal, even if it is characterized by a certain kind of indifference: a general nature cannot have the same properties with another general nature belonging to a separate type of beings and substances. All late scholasticism gradually comes to similar conclusions; Duns Scotus, William of Occam and other thinkers are trying to subject being to a rational classification.

The role of intelligence

Although Scotus is the first to speak of the distinction between universals and general natures, he draws inspiration from Avicenna's famous saying that a horse is just a horse. As Duns understands this statement, general natures are indifferent to individuality or universality. Although they cannot, in fact, exist without individualization or universalization, the common natures themselves are neither one nor the other. Following this logic, Duns Scot characterizes universality and individuality as random features of a common nature, which means that they need to be substantiated. All late scholasticism is distinguished by similar ideas; Duns Scotus, William of Ockham and some other philosophers and theologians give a key role human mind. It is the intellect that causes the general nature to be a universal, forcing it to belong to such a classification, and it turns out that quantitatively one concept can become a statement that characterizes many individuals.

Existence of God

Although God is not the subject of metaphysics, he is nevertheless the goal of this science; metaphysics seeks to prove its existence and supernatural nature. Scott offers several versions of the evidence for the existence higher intelligence; all these works are similar in terms of the nature of the narrative, structure and strategy. Duns Scotus created the most complex justification for the existence of God in all of scholastic philosophy. Its arguments unfold in four stages:

There is a first cause, a superior being, a first result.
Only one nature is first in all these three cases.
The nature that is first in any of the cases presented is infinite.
There is only one infinite being.

To justify the first claim, he makes a non-modal root cause argument:

A creature X is created.

Thus:

X is created by some other being Y.
Either Y is the original cause, or some third being created it.
The series of created creators cannot continue indefinitely.

This means that the series ends at the root cause - an uncreated being that is capable of producing regardless of other factors.

In terms of modality

Duns Scotus, whose biography consists only of periods of apprenticeship and teaching, in these arguments in no way deviates from the main principles of the scholastic philosophy of the Middle Ages. He also offers a modal version of his argument:

It is possible that there is an absolutely first powerful causal force.
If A cannot be descended from another being, then if A exists, it is independent.
The absolutely first powerful causal force cannot come from another being.
This means that the absolutely first powerful causal force is independent.

If the absolute root cause does not exist, then there is no real possibility of its existence. After all, if it is truly the first, it is impossible that it should depend on any other cause. Since there is a real possibility of its existence, it means that it exists by itself.

Doctrine of unambiguity

Duns Scotus' contribution to world philosophy invaluable. As soon as the scientist begins to indicate in his writings that the subject of metaphysics is the being as such, he continues the thought, arguing that the concept of being must unambiguously refer to everything that is studied by metaphysics. If this statement is true only in relation to a certain group of objects, the subject lacks the unity necessary for the possibility of studying this subject by a separate science. According to Duns, analogy is just a form of equivalence. If the concept of being determines the diverse objects of metaphysics only by analogy, then science cannot be considered unified.

Duns Scot offers two conditions for recognizing a phenomenon as unambiguous:

confirmation and denial of the same fact in relation to a single subject form a contradiction;
the concept of a given phenomenon can serve as a middle term for a syllogism.

For example, one can say without contradiction that Karen was on the jury of her own free will (because she would rather go to court than pay a fine) and against her own will at the same time (because she felt compelled on an emotional level). In this case, there is no contradiction, since the concept of "one's own will" is equivalent. Conversely, the syllogism "Inanimate objects cannot think. Some scanners think for a very long time before producing a result. Thus, some scanners are animate objects" leads to an absurd conclusion, since the concept of "think" is used in it interchangeably. Moreover, in the traditional sense of the word, the term is used only in the first sentence; in the second phrase it has a figurative meaning.

Ethics

The concept of the absolute power of God is the beginning of positivism, penetrating into all aspects of culture. John Duns Scotus believed that theology should explain controversial issues in religious texts; he explored new approaches to Bible study based on the primacy of divine will. An example is the ideas of meritoriousness: moral and ethical principles and man's actions are regarded as worthy or unworthy of a reward from God. Scott's ideas served as a justification for the new doctrine of predestination.

The philosopher is often associated with the principles of voluntarism - the tendency to emphasize the importance of divine will and human freedom in all theoretical matters.

Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception

As far as theology is concerned, Duns' most significant achievement is considered to be his defense of the Virgin Mary. In the Middle Ages, numerous theological disputes were devoted to this topic. According to the general opinion, Mary could have been a virgin at the conception of Christ, but the researchers of biblical texts did not understand how to solve the following problem: only after the death of the Savior did the stigma of original sin come off her.

Great philosophers and theologians Western countries divided into several groups, discussing this issue. Even Thomas Aquinas is believed to have denied the legitimacy of the doctrine, although some Thomists are not prepared to accept this claim. Duns Scotus, in turn, made the following argument: Mary needed redemption, like all people, but through the goodness of the crucifixion of Christ, taken into account before the relevant events occurred, the stigma of original sin disappeared from her.

This argument is given in the papal declaration of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. The Pope recommended reading the theology of Duns Scotus to modern students.

21.11.2020

Astrology | Feng Shui | Numerology

The most interesting: