Retrieving Aquinas: Traditions in Dialogue

Q3 Arts and Humanities Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia Pub Date : 2023-07-31 DOI:10.17990/rpf/2023_79_1_0013
Ricardo Barroso Batista, Bruno Nobre, Artur Ilharco Galvão
{"title":"Retrieving Aquinas: Traditions in Dialogue","authors":"Ricardo Barroso Batista, Bruno Nobre, Artur Ilharco Galvão","doi":"10.17990/rpf/2023_79_1_0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the broadest sense of the term, “Thomism” refers to a set of ideas and principles, both in philosophy and theology that can be considered as derivations or representations of the thought of Thomas Aquinas. However, Thomism should not be considered as a mere conceptual body. It also represents a certain view and way of doing philosophy and theology. Alasdair MacIntyre, in his book Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry, argues that the Thomistic approach provides a coherent and skillful point of view for dealing creatively and critically with opposing views, contrasting this approach with the encyclopedic and the genealogical approaches. The former imposes a single worldview, enclosing knowledge and “truth” in a monolithic structure of “progress,” while the latter, following Nietzsche, devalues and relativizes knowledge, reducing it to a multiplicity of perspectives, each with its own claims to truth, leading to incommensurability and the consequent subjugation of “truth” to the law of the strongest. On the other hand, Thomists have adopted, from the end of the thirteenth century to the present day, different styles and ways of thinking while maintaining dialogue with their “predecessors” and at the same time with their contemporaries, that is, Thomists are capable of what MacIntyre called the “rationality of tradition”.","PeriodicalId":36725,"journal":{"name":"Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17990/rpf/2023_79_1_0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the broadest sense of the term, “Thomism” refers to a set of ideas and principles, both in philosophy and theology that can be considered as derivations or representations of the thought of Thomas Aquinas. However, Thomism should not be considered as a mere conceptual body. It also represents a certain view and way of doing philosophy and theology. Alasdair MacIntyre, in his book Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry, argues that the Thomistic approach provides a coherent and skillful point of view for dealing creatively and critically with opposing views, contrasting this approach with the encyclopedic and the genealogical approaches. The former imposes a single worldview, enclosing knowledge and “truth” in a monolithic structure of “progress,” while the latter, following Nietzsche, devalues and relativizes knowledge, reducing it to a multiplicity of perspectives, each with its own claims to truth, leading to incommensurability and the consequent subjugation of “truth” to the law of the strongest. On the other hand, Thomists have adopted, from the end of the thirteenth century to the present day, different styles and ways of thinking while maintaining dialogue with their “predecessors” and at the same time with their contemporaries, that is, Thomists are capable of what MacIntyre called the “rationality of tradition”.
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
检索阿奎那:对话中的传统
从最广泛的意义上讲,“托马斯主义”指的是哲学和神学中的一套思想和原则,这些思想和原则可以被认为是托马斯·阿奎那思想的衍生或表现。然而,托马斯主义不应被视为一个纯粹的概念体。它也代表了一种研究哲学和神学的观点和方式。阿拉斯代尔·麦金太尔在他的《道德探究的三个对立版本》一书中认为,托马斯主义的方法为创造性地、批判性地处理对立观点提供了一个连贯的、熟练的观点,并将这种方法与百科全书式和宗谱式的方法进行了对比。前者强加了一种单一的世界观,将知识和“真理”封闭在一个“进步”的整体结构中,而后者则追随尼采,贬低和相对化知识,将其减少为多种观点,每种观点都有自己对真理的主张,导致不可通约性和随之而来的“真理”屈从于最强法则。另一方面,从十三世纪末到现在,托马斯主义者在与“前辈”和同时代人保持对话的同时,采用了不同的风格和思维方式,也就是说,托马斯主义者能够做到麦金太尔所说的“传统的理性”。
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
Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia
Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
73
期刊最新文献
Time for Truth: Tarski Between Heidegger and Rorty The Crowning of Anarchy, Remarks on the Age of Pure Difference Hospitalidade e conflito: o problema do “reconhecimento” no acolhimento de refugiados A “Modest” Primitivist Theory of Truth: The Ineffability of Truth, Effability of the Correspondence Relation A Holistic Double-Reference Explanatory Basis for a Unifying Pluralist Account of Truth
×
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:481959085
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