John Duns Scotus

Review of Allan B. Wolter and Daniel A. Frank, Duns Scotus: Metaphysician.

What role does Scotus‘s understanding of univocity play in Cajetan‘s development of a theory of analogy? In this paper I examine three relevant texts from Cajetan (question 3 of his commentary on Aquinas‘s De Ente et Essentia, his treatise De Nominum Analogia, and his commentary on question 13, article 5 of Aquinas‘s Summa Theologiae) in which Cajetan articulates his understanding of analogy at least in part through dialectical engagement with Scotus‘s arguments about univocity.

In his ethical writings, Duns Scotus emphasized both divine freedom and natural goodness, and these seem to conflict with each other in various ways. I offer an interpretation of Scotus which takes seriously these twin emphases and shows how they cohere. I argue that, for Scotus, all natural laws obtain just by the natures of actual things. Divine commands, such as the Ten Commandments, contingently track natural laws but do not make natural laws to be natural laws. I present textual (...) evidence for this claim. I also show how this view of Scotus on the natural law is consistent with a number of troubling passages. Scotus’s ethical theory implies that there are genuinely moral reasons for acting which are not absolutely binding (because subject to a divine command or permission otherwise) and also some moral reasons for acting which are absolutely binding (because not thus subject). (shrink)

The problem of divine impassibility, i.e., of whether the divine nature in Christ could suffer, stands at the center of a debate regarding the nature of God and his relation to us. Whereas philosophical reasoning regarding the divine nature maintains that the divine is immutable and perfect in every respect, theological needs generated an ever-growing demand for a passionate God truly able to participate in the suffering of his creatures. Correlating with the different approaches of Thomas Aquinas and John Duns (...) Scotus, the paper develops an incarnation model that aims, on the one hand, to solve the dualistic problem between the divine and human natures, and on the other hand to make room for both impassible and passible elements in God, and so to make room within the patristic impassible model for genuine suffering in God. The discussion, though centered around Christ's im/passibility and passions, can easily be modified to approach the body-mind problem since the essence of the problems is the same. (shrink)

In this paper the authors deals with the relation between the Irish Franciscan Hugh McCaghwell’s commentary on Scotus’s De anima and Suárez’s. It is shown that the latter provided a model and a reference text for McCaghwell who reproduces the philosopher’s thought within his commentary. Moreover, the explicit and implicit quotations of Suárez are taken into account: far from admitting his debt, McCaghwell criticizes the philosopher when he does not seem to follow the Scotist path. The commentary’s sections analysed are (...) those concerning the Scotist account of abstraction and the cognition of material substances. (shrink)

Duns Scotus defends the view that we can speak univocally of God and creatures. When we do so, we use words in the same sense in the two cases. Scotus maintains that the concepts that these univocal words signify are themselves univocal: the same concept in the two cases. In this paper, I consider a related question: does Duns Scotus have the notion of analogous concepts—concepts whose relation to each other lies somewhere between the univocal and the equivocal? Using some (...) neglected texts from Scotus’s attempt to refute Henry of Ghent’s rejection of univocity, I argue that he does, and that he uses his account of univocity to ground the relation of analogy between two concepts. According to Scotus, analogous concepts are compositional, and overlap at a univocal concept. (shrink)

The paper presents some basic tenets of the works by the Franciscan Friar Alfonso Briceño, as well as of his metaphysical thought. After offering the basic structure and purpose of his monumental Controversiae, we focus on a more specific way of seeing his philosophical and theological approach, namely Controversy 5 on the infinity of God. This will allow us to see the structure of his argumentation in philosophy and theology: after putting the formulation of controversial points between the Scotist and (...) the Thomist school, he analyzes arguments against the Thomist position both in the Medieval and Baroque traditions, trying then to defend Duns Scotus’s account by a careful and articulated interpretation of his texts. (shrink)

Neste artigo, o autor começa por discorrer sobre os últimos anos de vida do Doutor Subtil, marcados pelo célebre conflito em torno às relações de poder, ocorrido entre Filipe IV "O Belo", rei da França, e o papa Bonifácio viu, por causa das posições que ele assumiu e de sua relação com a questão da origem da propriedade e da autoridade secular. Para o Menorita escocês tanto a propriedade ou o domínio particular sobre os bens quanto a autoridade secular foram (...) instituídas pelos seres humanos, não por Deus, após a Queda Original, porque condiziam melhor com sua nova condição, influenciada por suas más inclinações. Por isso, foi necessário que houvesse uma autoridade política e leis por ela promulgadas, a fim de regular a convivência social. Os ensinamentos de Escoto sobre esses assuntos significam a via media entre as teses extremistas propostas, de um lado, pelos defensores da hierocracia pontifícia e, de outro, pelos assessores de Filipe IV. /// The author starts the article with a consideration of the last years of Duns Scotus' life, which was particularly marked by the famous conflict, around the relations of power, occurred between Philip IV, "The Fair", king of France, and Pope Boniface VIII, because of the positions which the scotch Friar assumed regarding the question about the origin of property and about the origin of the secular authority. As a matter of fact, for Duns Scotus, both the property and the political authority were established by men, after the Original Fall, not by God, because they are more in consonance with the new condition of humans, marked by their bad passions. Therefore, it was necessary to have a political authority able to promulgate laws in order to regulate the social life. The article shows that the teaching of Duns Scotus about these subjects constitutes a via media between the extremist doctrines professed, on the one hand, by the defenders of the hierocracy and, on the other, by the assessors of Philip IV. (shrink)

Long ago B. Xiberta surveyed the ideas and works of the Carmelite theologians of the 14th century and attempted to place them in the context of their more famous Dominican, Franciscan, and Augustinian contemporaries. This article resumes Xiberta’s effort by examining the positions of the Parisian Carmelites Gerard of Bologna and Guy Terrena on the problem of divine foreknowledge and future contingents, defended in works composed in 1313-1320. While the Dominicans argued amongst themselves – usually against Durand of St Pourçain (...) – about the meaning of Thomas Aquinas’ opinion, and the Franciscans all attacked Thomas and mostly followed John Duns Scotus’ alterative theory, Gerard and Guy offered independent and critical responses to both Aquinas and Scotus. The article, which also discusses chronological and textual issues, concludes with critical editions of the pertinent questions from Gerard’s Summa theologiae and Guy’s Quodlibeta. (shrink)

Thomas Williams has developed a radical interpretation of Duns Scotus’s voluntarism using an earlier interpretation of my own as a foil. He argues that the goodness of creatures and the rightness of actions are wholly dependent on the divine will, apart from any reference to the divine intellect, human nature, or any principle other than God’s own arbitrary will. I explain how his interpretation fails to account for the roles that essential goodness and divine justice play in divine volition. The (...) unmitigated voluntarism that Williams develops does not conform to the full range of authentic Scotistic texts. Despite the interest Williams’s voluntarism may have if taken as a theoretical position, it does not do justice to the nuance and speculative depth of Scotus’s actual understanding of the divine will, whose creative artistry is repugnant to arbitrary volition. I am grateful to Williams for the provocation to develop further the richness of Scotus’s volutarism. (shrink)

This article is part of a larger project defending a version of divine command theory in ethics. What I am interested in from Scotus is that he combines such a theory with a view that grounds ethics in nature, especially human nature. In order to understand this combination, we need to start with his view of the two affections. Scotus takes from Anselm the idea that humans have in their will two basic affections (or intellectual appetites), what he calls the (...) affection for advantage (affectiocommodi) and the affection for justice (affectiojustitiae). All acts of the will, on this view, stem from one affection or the other. Behind Anselm is Augustine's insistence, which Scotus alre refers to frequently, that God is to be enjoyed and not used (even though entering into God's love is our greatest happiness), and everything else is to be used and not enjoyed. (shrink)

Students of later medieval semantics are familiar with the controversy that developed at the end of the thirteenth century over the signification of names. The debate focused on the signification of common nouns such as and : Do they signify an extramental thing or a mental representation of an extramental thing? 1 Duns Scotus is commonly recognized as having played an important role in this debate. 2 In his Ordinatio, he alludes to a magnaaltercatio among his contemporaries concerning signification. 3 (...) What is more, he gives, in his two commentaries on Aristotle’s Perihermeneias, a detailed and fair analysis of the two contrasting positions on this issue. 4. (shrink)

In some passages Scotus seems to endorse a thoroughgoing voluntarism, holding not merely that the moral law is established entirely by God's will, but even that there is no reason why God wills in one way rather than another. In other passages, however, Scotus insists that reason plays an important role in morality—that right reason is an essential element in the moral goodness of an action, and that moral truth is accessible to natural reason. -/- Many commentators have supposed that (...) these two views are incompatible, and so they have seen only three options for interpreting Scotus: (i) one can simply concede that Scotus is inconsistent, (ii) one can deny that Scotus in fact allows reason a place in morality, or (iii) one can deny that Scotus is really a thoroughgoing voluntarist. We can find all three of these views in print. By laying out Scotus's view of the role of reason in morality and showing how it coheres with his voluntarism, I show that there is in fact no difficulty here. (shrink)

Among the proofs he gives for the existence of God Scotus makes no mention of the proof from motion. In this he differs from St Thomas, for whom the proof from motion is, apparently, the proof for the existence of God. Why does Scotus omit the proof from motion? Is it, as has been held, because he regarded this proof as simply a special form of the proof from efficient causality? Or is it because he held the proof from motion (...) to be essentially defective? (shrink)

--I. The place of Duns Scotus in medieval thought.--II. The philosophical doctrines of Duns Scotus.