The Metaphysics of John Duns Scotus :: Philosophy Philosophical Papers

The Metaphysics of John Duns Scotus The ecclesiastical condemnation of Aristoteleanism and Arabian philosophy in 1277, which included both(prenominal) of the theses of Thomas Aquinas, had a profound influence on the subsequent development of medieval philosophy. Of course, opposition to Greco-Arabian philosophy was nonhing new in the 13th century. Its scuttle decades had seen the newly translated work of Aristotle and Averroes forbidden yet their vogue spread, and in the years 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 traditionalist theologians that any Christian who accepted the credentials of Aristoteleanism must arrive at conclusions hostile to faith. The great condemnation of 1277 expressed their renewed reaction to Aristotle and left an even deeper impression on subsequent scholars of the inadequacy of philosophy a nd pure 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 idea is naturally turned towards sensible things from the way is must render all its knowledge 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 retard that Aristotle correctly described our present way of knowing, but he did contest that he had said 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 Man is now in a fallen state and that he was descr ibing the knowledge, not of an integral Man, but one whose mode of knowing was radically altered by original sin. Ignorance of this fact is understandable in Aristotle, but it must view as seemed inexcusable in a Christian theologian like 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.