God and Necessity: the notion of the necessary in Aristotle and Anselm of Canterbury
Keywords:
Aristotle, Anselm of Canterbury, necessity, chance, free choice, determinism, ancient Greek philosophy, medieval philosophy, scholasticismAbstract
The given article seeks to offer a comparative analysis of the initial Aristotelian philosophy of necessity as expressed in De interpretatione ІХ and the earliest scholastic rendering of this concept as expressed in Anselm of Canterbury’s De concordia I. The double goal in view is an attempt at sketching the early medieval version of the post-Aristotelian interpretation of the notion of the necessary and, specifically, the outlining of the most crucial linguistical and conceptual changes and innovations offered by this version offered. Thus, the study is focused on analysis and further comparison of Aristotle’s language and ideas pertaining to the subject with those of Anselm, which in the end allows to trace some lines of continuity, as well as points of divergence, between the two thinkers. Its value, then, consists of a contribution to the rethinking of the image of Aristoteles latinus and the deeper understanding of the early scholastic philosophical theology.
References
Aristotle (1938). Περˆ ˜ρμηνείας — On Interpretation. In: H. P. Cooke (Trans.). The categories. On interpretation. Prior Analytics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, vol. 1, pp. 114–180). [= Aristotle 1938]
Aristotle (1978). On Interpretation. [In Russian]. In: Z. N. Mikeladze (ed.). Works in four volumes (transl. E.L. Radlov, ed. Z.N. Mikeladze). Moscow: Mysl’, vol. 2, pp. 91–116. [=Аристотель 1978]
Aristotle and A. Markov (2015, June 8). On Interpretation. Chapters 8–13 with appendices. [In Russian]. Retrieved from: http://gefter.ru/archive/15403 [=Аристотель и Марков 2015]
Anselm of Canterbury (2000). The Harmony of the Foreknowledge, the Predestination, and the Grace of God with Free Choice. In: J. Hopkins, H. Richardson (Trans.). Complete Phi losophical and Theological Treatises of Anselm of Canterbury. Minneapolis, MN: The Arthur J. Banning Press, pp. 531–574. [= Anselm of Canterbury 2000]
Anselmus Cantuariensis (1940). De concordia praescientiae et praedestinationis et gratiae dei cum libero arbitrio. In: F. S. Schmitt (Ed.). Sancti Anselmi Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi Opera Omnia. Romae, vol. 2, pp. 243–288. [= Anselmus Cantuariensis 1940]
Baumeister, A. (2012). Anselm of Canterbury: Fides quaerens intellectum. [In Ukrainian]. In: Anselm of Canterbury. Monologion. Proslogion (translation: Rostislav Paran’ko, introduction and commentaries: Andrii Baumeister). Lviv: Ukrainian Catholic University publishing house, pp. xvii–lxvi. [=Баумейстер 2012]
Cameron, M., Marenbon, J. (2010). Aristotelian Logic East and West, 500-1500: "On In terpretation" and "Prior Analytics" in Two Traditions: Introduction. In: Vivarium, 48(1/2), 1–6. [= Cameron and Marenbon 2010] https://doi.org/10.1163/156853410X489691
Cassin, B. (2004). «Tukhê » et « automaton » chez Aristote. In: B. Cassin (ed). Vocabulaire euro péen des philosophies. Paris: Éditions du Seuil / Dictionnaires Le Robert, p. 668. [= Кас сен 2011]
Dvoretskiy, I.Kh. (1976). Latin-Russian Dictionary (2nd rev. ed.). [In Russian]. Мoscow: Russkiy yazyk. [= Дворецкий 1976]
Glare, P.G.W., et al. (1968). Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [= Glare et al. 1968]
Hopkins, J. (1972). A companion to the study of St. Anselm. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. [= Hopkins 1972]
Knuuttila, S. (2004). Anselm on Modality. In: B. Davies & B. Leftow (Eds.). The Cambridge Companion to Anselm. Cambridge: University Press, pp. 111–131. [= Knuuttila 2004] https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521807468.006
Knuuttila, S. (2015). Medieval Theories of Modality. In: E. N. Zalta (Ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2015). Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/modality-medieval/ [= Knuuttila 2015]
Marenbon, J. (1983). Early Medieval Philosophy (480-1150): An Introduction. London; Boston: Routledge & K. Paul. [= Marenbon 1983]
Marenbon, J. (2007). Medieval Philosophy: An Historical and Philosophical Introduction. London: Routledge. [= Marenbon 2007]
Parisse, M., Bertrand, P., Duchet-Suchaux, M., Goullet, M., et al. (2006). Lexique Latin-Fran çais: Antiquité et Moyen Age. Paris: Picard. [= Parisse et al. 2006]
Pucci, P. (2004). Kêr. In: B. Cassin (ed). Vocabulaire européen des philosophies. Paris: Éditions du Seuil / Dictionnaires Le Robert, pp. 665-671. [= Пуччі 2011]
Tkachenko, R. (2015). An Analysis of Anselm's Philosophical Theology and the Problem of Man's Freedom in His De Concordia. In: Sententiae, XXXII(1), 6–35. [= Tkachenko 2015] https://doi.org/10.22240/sent32.01.006
Visser, S., Williams, T. (2009). Anselm. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [= Visser and Williams 2009]
Vos, A. (2014). Paul Helm on Medieval Scholasticism. Journal of Reformed Theology, 8(3), 263–283. [= Vos 2014] https://doi.org/10.1163/15697312-00803003
Downloads
-
PDF (Українська)
Downloads: 200
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
