List of Articles Thomas Aquinas

• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  1 - God’s Knowledge of Particulars in the Views of Ibn Sīnā and Thomas Aquinas
  Mohammad Mahmoodi Hossein Kalbasi Ashtari
  One of the fundamental questions in the field of philosophical theology is whether God has the knowledge of particulars. Some philosophers have tried to either demonstrate or deny the divine knowledge of particulars regardless of the term “God”, which is a controversial More

  One of the fundamental questions in the field of philosophical theology is whether God has the knowledge of particulars. Some philosophers have tried to either demonstrate or deny the divine knowledge of particulars regardless of the term “God”, which is a controversial issue. In a philosophical tradition that began with Plato and Aristotle and was advocated by Ibn Sīnā, the divine knowledge of particulars is denied. However, within the framework of the same philosophical school, Thomas Aquinas, as a theologian, demonstrates this knowledge for God. In Ibn Sīnā’s view, there is a fundamental difference between quiddity and existence as two different levels of being. The Necessary Being is the cause of granting existence to quiddities and, thus, cannot know them in terms of their particulars, as they lack “existence” in separation from Him. However, Ibn Sīnā does not deny the divine knowledge of particulars through their “existence”. In Aquinas’ theological concept of God, as a personal God, the denial of the divine knowledge of particulars defaces the divine power. Moreover, in case of denying this Knowledge, Man, who is created by God, will be placed at a higher level than their Creator because they can gain the knowledge of particulars. Aquinas, who speaks as a theologian here, ignores the borderline between philosophy and theology and objects to Ibn Sīnā by stating that some universals such as “animal” and “human” cannot function as the distinctive features of a particular such as “Socrates” in comparison to others. The present paper provides a comparative analysis of the views of these two philosophers regarding God’s knowledge of particulars. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  2 - Historical Development of the Meaning of Philosophy from Ancient Greece to Mullā Ṣadrā: A Study of the Role of Spiritual Practice in Explaining Mullā Ṣadrā’s Philosophy Based on Hadot’s Approach
  Majeed Pirhoseinloo Tahereh Kamalizadeh Seyyed Mustafa  Shahraeini
  <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 1.0cm; line-height: 130%;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-bidi; mso-hansi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-bidi; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roma More

  <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 1.0cm; line-height: 130%;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-bidi; mso-hansi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-bidi; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-theme-font: major-bidi;">Pierre Hadot, the French Philosopher, considers ancient Greek philosophy as &ldquo;a way of life&rdquo;. He has no positive view of Scholastic Christian philosophies and believes that the rise of Christianity was the main reason behind the fall of philosophy from its main place as a way of life. Accordingly, he seriously questions the possibility of explaining and investigating Scholastic philosophies and their most important representatives, particularly Thomas Aquinas, and other religion-based-philosophies, such as Sadrian philosophy. The present paper explores the possibility of explaining Mullā Ṣadrā&rsquo;s philosophy as a way of life based on Pierre Hadot&rsquo;s approach to philosophy. Previously, in his study of Aquinas&rsquo; philosophy, Matthew Kruger stated that Hadot&rsquo;s perception of Aquinas&rsquo; philosophy was incorrect and inaccurate while, if it is understood correctly, it is possible to explain it as a way of life based on Hadot&rsquo;s approach to ancient Greek philosophy. Kruger has challenged Hadot&rsquo;s view by resorting to some arguments such as Hadot&rsquo;s incorrect perception of Aquinas&rsquo; philosophy and his disagreement with Thomasian tradition, Thomas&rsquo; attention to spiritual life, and presence of spiritual practice in his philosophy. In this paper, the authors initially present Kruger&rsquo;s arguments and then, by providing some similar proofs from Mullā Ṣadrā&rsquo;s works, try to elucidate the possibility of explaining Mullā Ṣadrā&rsquo;s philosophy as a way of life based on Hadot&rsquo;s approach. Following Kruger, they conclude that, at least regarding spiritual practices, which Hadot considers as one of the pillars of the theory of philosophy as a way of life, Mullā Ṣadrā&rsquo;s philosophy can also be interpreted as a way of life. The novelty of this paper lies in the fact that it aims to demonstrate the possibility of such a research while being loyal to Hadot&rsquo;s general theory, which was apparently considered to be a presupposition in the past. </span></p> Manuscript profile