tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472139466585018053.post4501216474930299215..comments2024-03-11T04:11:06.487-04:00Comments on The Smithy: The Destroyers of PhilosophyLee Faberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00476833516234522602noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472139466585018053.post-32735390062810302242015-02-17T18:14:00.031-05:002015-02-17T18:14:00.031-05:00Johannes, if by 'ens' and 'esse' y...Johannes, if by 'ens' and 'esse' you mean real beings out in the world, then no, they are not univocal. What Scotus says is that one can form concepts that apply univocally to God and creatures without a corresponding non-conceptual reality. One abstracts the intrinsic mode from a creature to get the univocal concept that applies to both God and creatures, then apply the intrinsic mode of infinity to get a concept of God. But outside the intellect there is a great warm bubbly stew of analogy an particpation to warm the belly of any thomist.Lee Faberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00476833516234522602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472139466585018053.post-49930326984881693082015-02-17T10:42:33.237-05:002015-02-17T10:42:33.237-05:00It would be very helpful in these translations to ...It would be very helpful in these translations to state between parentheses the Latin word translated as "being", so as to know whether it was "ens" or "esse".<br /><br />Also, is the following a correct summary of the positions?<br /><br />Scotus: ens & esse are univocal.<br /><br />St. Thomas & the Thomists: ens is analogical, esse is univocal.<br /><br />(My own position, FWIW: ens is analogical and esse might also be so.)<br />Johanneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05371418313799513738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472139466585018053.post-2359079822919665202015-01-16T17:41:51.943-05:002015-01-16T17:41:51.943-05:00Pini starts an article with this and gives a paral...Pini starts an article with this and gives a parallel, but it's probably just to another argument about the knowability or not of substance, not to the 'destruction' etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472139466585018053.post-55435267535757368402015-01-14T06:27:51.560-05:002015-01-14T06:27:51.560-05:00I was just reading this today. I couldn't fin...I was just reading this today. I couldn't find any parallel to it in the <i>Ordinatio</i>.Edward Ockhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.com