The Christian Structure of Politics: On the "De regno" of Thomas Aquinas by William McCormick (review)

Douglas Kries
{"title":"The Christian Structure of Politics: On the \"De regno\" of Thomas Aquinas by William McCormick (review)","authors":"Douglas Kries","doi":"10.1353/tho.2023.a900232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"in a potential or actual state, and it is when both are actual that they become the same: “the act of understanding (noēsis) is one with the [actual] object of understanding (nooumenon)” (Metaphys. 12.9.1075a4-5 [my translations]). This presents a problem for Kelsey’s general claim that to be intelligible is to be an activity of intelligence. Second, Aristotle’s frequent remark that we should start from what is “poorly knowable” (phaulōs gnōston) but knowable to us and proceed to the knowledge of what is knowable “in itself by nature” implies that objects are intelligible in an objective sense alien to Kelsey’s interpretation (see Metaphys. 7.3.1029b3-11; this is quoted by Kelsey on page 156 but an important part is missing). To sum up, Kelsey stakes out an original interpretation and defends it forcefully. Even those who are not convinced will gain valuable insights, especially concerning Aristotle’s concept of measure and his emphasis on intelligence as active process rather a mere passive reception of forms. It is a must read for any scholar of Aristotle’s epistemology.","PeriodicalId":356918,"journal":{"name":"The Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/tho.2023.a900232","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

in a potential or actual state, and it is when both are actual that they become the same: “the act of understanding (noēsis) is one with the [actual] object of understanding (nooumenon)” (Metaphys. 12.9.1075a4-5 [my translations]). This presents a problem for Kelsey’s general claim that to be intelligible is to be an activity of intelligence. Second, Aristotle’s frequent remark that we should start from what is “poorly knowable” (phaulōs gnōston) but knowable to us and proceed to the knowledge of what is knowable “in itself by nature” implies that objects are intelligible in an objective sense alien to Kelsey’s interpretation (see Metaphys. 7.3.1029b3-11; this is quoted by Kelsey on page 156 but an important part is missing). To sum up, Kelsey stakes out an original interpretation and defends it forcefully. Even those who are not convinced will gain valuable insights, especially concerning Aristotle’s concept of measure and his emphasis on intelligence as active process rather a mere passive reception of forms. It is a must read for any scholar of Aristotle’s epistemology.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基督教政治结构:论托马斯·阿奎那的“权力论”威廉·麦考密克(书评)
在一种潜在的或现实的状态中,当两者都是现实的时候,它们就变成了同一:“理解的行为(noēsis)与理解的(现实的)对象(本体)是一体的”(《形而上学》,12.9.1075a - 4[我的翻译])。这就给凯尔西的一般主张提出了一个问题,即具有可解性就是具有智力的活动。其次,亚里士多德常说,我们应当从"不甚可知"的东西(phaulōs gnōston)出发,而我们是可知的,然后再去认识"本质上本身"可知的东西,这句话的意思是,客体在凯尔西的解释中是可理解的,这与他的解释是不同的(见形而上学。凯尔西在156页引用了这段话,但遗漏了一个重要部分)。总之,凯尔西提出了一种原创的解释,并有力地为其辩护。即使那些不相信的人也会获得有价值的见解,特别是关于亚里士多德的测量概念和他强调智力是主动过程,而不仅仅是被动接受形式。这是任何研究亚里士多德认识论的学者的必读之作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Thomas Aquinas and the Theological Education of Seminarians Aquinas on Efficient Causation and Causal Powers by Gloria Frost (review) Thomas Aquinas: Master of Priestly Human Formation The Spiritual Formation of Priests: Lessons from St. Thomas Aquinas God's Knowledge of the World: Medieval Theories of Divine Ideas from Bonaventure to Ockham by Carl A. Vater (review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1