Friday, October 8, 2010

The Fundamentals

In a recent post on Dr. Feser's blog, a commentator asked why Scotus could be considered a classical theist if he held univocity. Consulting my own blog, I realized that while I had criticized numerous contemporary accounts of univocity (fr. Barron, Turner, the Cambridge Phantasists, etc.), I had given no alternative of my own. So, lest I be accused of only tearing down and not building up, I will attempt to write a series on Scotus' basic positions and the arguments he makes for them (remember, Thomas Williams already has an online summary). These will take a while, and I make no promises of ever finishing, but here's a preliminary list.

I. natural knowledge of God.
II. existence of God
III. object of the intellect, certitude, further problems of univocity
IV. divine simplicity
V. divine attributes
VI. the will (probably will end up as a separate series)


Brandon said...

Looking forward to this!

awatkins909 said...

That was me. This will be much appreciated. Thanks.

Tap said...

On that note, you said on WWWT: "was recently at a talk by Richard which he stated that there is a clear progression from the cappocians to Palamas, a progression progressively "reifying" the energies. Dr. Cross even went so far as to describe Palamas' views as a "corruption" of the eastern tradition. So it would seem that the eastern tradition is not as unified as suggested.

Did Dr. Cross write any papers on this? A book on the way perhaps?
A blog post from y'all elaborating on this?

Codgitator (Cadgertator) said...

I'm with Tap!

Lee Faber said...

Cross' remarks were at a seminar devoted to a new article he is publishing. I thought I might have heard it was going to be in faith and philosophy but ask Scott Williams (from teh henry of ghent blog). All he said on the eastern issue I summarized on w4.

Asello Guzman said...

sounds like a great idea! maybe it will turn into a good introductory text, competing with Inghams