I came across this video on univocity recently, and I can report it is quite good. Probably the best discussion of Scotus on univocity I have ever seen from a non Scotus expert.
Naturally I had some minor complaints. One is that it is not controversial to call God being itself, given the medieval interpretation of Exodus 3:14 which ensconced being as the primary name of God. Another is that I don't think the 'being among beings' was really ever an issue, that is, that univocity rendered God just a being beings. It is true, one can find Bonaventure saying that God is not 'ens inter entia sed super entia', but the modern slogan is more an extreme platonist claim that God is rather beyond being, something most scholastics would disagree with (as per Exodus). The real issue about univocity is what Aquinas had said, that it destroys divine simplicity (I don't think the medievals would even say that God is transcendent or transcendental). If God is in a genus with creatures, then there would be an aspect in God that was held in common with creatures, and an aspect that was unique to God, and so at least two univocal parts [reality of genus and reality of specific difference].
No comments:
Post a Comment