Epistemic origins of neo-scholastic interpretation of ontological proof of divine existence and discussions concerning ontologism

Authors

  • Rodion V. Savinov St. Petersburg State Academy of Veterinary Medicine, Chernigovskaya ul., 5, St. Petersburg, 196084, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu28.2019.303

Abstract

The article discusses the problem of the foundation of the development and evaluation of ontological (aprioristic) proof of Divine existence in some traditions in the philosophy of the 19th century such as Ontologism and Neo-Scholasticism. The history of the development of this argument in the tradition of the Middle Ages and Early Modern period illustrates that at its foundation is the belief in the possibility of direct (obvious, evidential) apprehension of certain metaphysical principles that relate to the Divine existence, and their formal (aprioristic) demonstration. Thus, the difference in meaning of the possibility of explicating these principles (and recognition or non-recognition of this epistemological possibility) founded differences in evaluation of ontological proof. It has been shown that scholasticism, in the end, rejected this opportunity and was highly critical and negatively interpretated this kind of proof, while some modern thinkers have recognized this opportunity and included this proof in their philosophical theology (Descartes, Leibniz and other). We analyzed the teaching of A. Rosmini, V. Gioberti, and С. Ubags, that returned to the ontological proof, based on the Modern European philosophy, and they considered ontological proof as the basis of all philosophical and theological thinking. The Neo-Scholastic and Neo-Thomism traditions were then studied: Th.-М. Zigliara, J. Kleitgen, G. Sanseverino, and J. Franzelin who argued against the ontological proof and proposed epistemic arguments related to the non-evidentialistic interpretation of knowledge and the disclosure of internal mediating mechanisms of cognitive activity. In conclusion, despite the predominantly metaphysical and theological basis of the discussion, it took place within the framework of the discussion of epistemic models, and this is important for the history of the theory of knowledge and history of the formation of Neo-Thomism, which (through F. Brentano, a witness of these discussions) is associated with several schools of contemporary philosophy.

Keywords:

Neo-Scholasticism, Neo-Thomism, Ontologism, epistemology, proof of the Divine existence, knowledge, thinking, до- казательства бытия Божия, познание, мышление

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
 

References

Ern V. F. (2006) “Discussions Gioberti and Rosmini”, in: Valentin F. Ern: Pro et Contra. Ern’s Life and Works in view of Russians Thinkers and Reseachers: A Reader. Ed. by Alexander A. Ermichev. St. Peterburg, RHGA Publ., pp. 521–537 (In Russian)

Ern V. F. (1915) “Gioberti’s Philosophy”, in: Main Questions in Philosophy and Psychology, no. 129 (IV), pp. 467–529. (In Russian)

Ern V. F. (1914) Rosmini and his Theory of Knowledge. Study in History of Italian Philosophy in 19th century. Moscow, Put Publ. (In Russian)

Frank S. L. (2000) Object of the Knowledge. Human Soul. Minsk; Moscow, Harvest Publ; AST Publ. (In Russian)

Franzelin J. B. (1870) Tractatus de Deo uno secundum naturam. Romae; Taurini, Typis Prop. Fidei; Marietti.

Gioberti V. (1847) Introduction à l’étude de la philosophie. Vol. 3. Bruxelle, Lecoffre.

Kleutgen J. (1869) La philosophie scolastique, exposée et défendue. Vol. 2. Paris, Gaume Frères et J. Duprey.

Liberatore P. (1827) Dimostrazione a priori della esistenza di Dio. Napoli, Trani.

Rosmini A. (2017) Theodicy: Essays on Divine Providence. Glasgow, Bell and Baine Lim.

Rosmini А. (1883) The Origin Of Ideas. Vol. 3. London, K. Paul, Trench, & co.

Sanseverino G. (1868) Philosophia Christiana cum antiqva et nova comparata. In compendium redacta. Vol. I–II. Neapoli, Manfredi.

Steklʼ A. (1912). History of Medieval Philosophy. Moscow, Sablin Publ. (In Russian)

Ubaghs G. C. (1860) Essai d’idéologie ontologique ou considérations philosophiques sur la nature de nos idées et sur l’ontologisme en général. Louvain, Vanlinthout.

Ubaghs G. C. (1841) Theodiceae seu Theologiae Naturalis Elementae. Lovanii, Vanlinthout et Vandenzande.

Zigliara Th.-M. (1880) Oeuvres philosophiques du Cardinal Thomas-Marie Zigliara . Vol. 2. Lyon, Vitte et Perrussel.

Zigliara Th.-M. (1881) Oeuvres philosophiques du Cardinal Thomas-Marie Zigliara. Vol. 3. Lyon, Vitte et Perrussel.

Zigliara Th.-M. (1902) Summa Philosophica. 13en ed. Vol. 2. Paris, Beauchesne et Co.

Published

2019-11-01

Issue

Section

Research