Theology, Philosophy (2)
  • tim wood
    8.7k
    From The Unity of Philosophical Experience, Gilson, 1948.

    "There is an ethical problem at the root of our philosophical difficulties; for men are most anxious to find truth, but very reluctant to accept it.... The greatest among philosophers are those who do not flinch in the presence of truth, but welcome it with the simple words: yes, Amen.

    St. Thomas Aquinas was one.... [He] asked his professors of theology never to prove an article of faith by rational demonstration, for faith is not based on reason, but on the word of God, and if you try to prove it, you destroy it. He likewise asked the professors of philosophy never to prove a philosophical truth by resorting to the words of God, for philosophy is not based on Revelation, but on reason, and if you try to base it on authority, you destroy it. In other words, theology is the science of those things which are received by faith from divine revelation, and philosophy is the knowledge of those things which flow from the principles of natural reason.

    Since their common source is God, the creator of both reason and revelation, these two sciences are bound ultimately to agree, but if you really want them to agree, you must first be careful not to forget their essential differences Only distinct things can be united; if you attempt to blend them, you inevitably lose them in what is not union, but confusion" (62).
    tim wood Options
  • schopenhauer1
    10k
    if you attempt to blend them, you inevitably lose them in what is not union, but confusion" (62). — tim wood

    But in his case, as is the the case with many medieval philosophers and modern theologians, reason will always lead to theologically compliant conclusions. The deck is stacked, and thus any claims to free-thinking inquiry are already negated from the start.
    schopenhauer1 Options
  • tim wood
    8.7k
    But in his case, as is the the case with many medieval philosophers and modern theologians, reason will always lead to theologically compliant conclusions. The deck is stacked, and thus any claims to free-thinking inquiry are already negated from the start. — schopenhauer1

    I'm learning that many philosophers wrote things that are disingenuous at best. That is, I agree. But if he had written otherwise, might he have been burned at some stake?

    I was more taken by the seeming gentle insistence that theology and philosophy are different animals and shouldn't be cross-bred, though they may well live in the same barn. Maybe that was the best he could do. That is, let reason be reason.
    tim wood Options
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment