The Theory of Intellectual Cognition (Francis Suárez’ approach)

Authors

  • Robert Goczał Papieski Wydział Teologiczny we Wrocławiu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15633/r.2145

Keywords:

intelectual cognition, second intention, essence of being, passive and active intellect

Abstract

This paper concerns Suárez’ intellectual cognition which is directly related to the theory of objective being, although understood differently than in the present times. In the discussion of intellectual cognition he placed the concept of first and second intention. Suárez especially indicates the order of so­‑called the “second intention” in which the intellect perceives being through the very objective being (noetic order), which is characterized by undivided and undifferentiated status at the level of active intellect. Thus Suárez’ objective order of cognition is not distinctively determined. This makes the being to be comprehended through the objective concept of being from the noetic perspective as referring equally to the singular entities as well as universal, finite and infinite, being created and uncreated. Considering the above, one can agree with the position according to which Suárez’ intellectual cognition can be considered as a scholastic theory that could have a significant bearing on the future epistemology in modern rationalism, especially which had considerable influence on the Cartesian model of subjective knowledge and Kantian critical transcendental philosophy. Suárez’ approach meets with the theory that influenced the modern epistemology and post­‑Cartesian philosophy as a cognitive shift towards a new subjective prospect (e.g. in se conversa), in which reflection on real being was shifted toward the cognitive representations, that is, toward the noetic reflection and mentalism.

References

Ashworth E. J., The Tradition of Mediaeval Logic and Speculative Grammar, Toronto 1978.

Aquinatis S. T., Scriptum super Sententiis magistri Petri Lombardi, t. 1, ed. P. Man­donnet, Parisiis 1929.

Aquinatis S. T., In Aristotelis librum de Anima commentarium (In III de Anima), ed. A. M. Pirotta, Torino 1959.

Aquino S. T. de, Summa Theologiae IIª­‑IIae, Textus Leoninus, Romae 1895.

Biel G., Epitome et Collectiorum ex Occamo circa quatuor Sententiarum Libros, Tübingen 1501 (reprint Frankfurt am Main 1965).

Conti A. D., Second Intentions in the Late Middle Ages, w: Medieval Analysis in Language and Cognition, eds. S. Ebbesen, R. Friedmann, Copenhagen 1999, s. 453–470.

Darge R., Suárez’ transzendentale Seinsauslegung und die Metaphysiktradition, Leiden–Boston 2004.

Doyle J. P., Prolegomena to a Study of Extrinsic Denomination in the work of Francis Suárez S. J., „Vivarium” (1984) 22, s. 121–160.

Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. P. Edwards, t. 7, New York 1967.

Forlivesi M., La distinction entre concept formel et concept objectif: Suárez, Pasqualigo, Mastri, trad. di O. Boulnois, „Les Études Philosophiques” (2002) 1, s. 3–30.

Gilson E., Historia filozofii chrześcijańskiej w wiekach średnich, przeł. S. Zalewski, Warszawa 1987.

Gilson E., Tomizm, przeł. J. Rybałt, Warszawa 1998.

Grabmann M., Die Disputationes Metaphysicae des Franz Suárez in ihrer me­tho­dischen Eigenart und Fortwirkung, w: Mittekakterkuches Geustesleben. Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Scholastik und Mystik, München 1926, s. 517–524.

Ioannis a Sancto Thoma, Cursus Philosophicus Thomisticus, t. 1, Ars Logica, Parisiis 1883.

Hellín J., El concepto formal en Suárez, „Pensamiento” (1962) 18, s. 407–432.

Krąpiec M. A., Z teorii i metodologii metafizyki, w: M. A. Krąpiec, Dzieła, t. 4, Lublin 1994.

Kretzman N., Semantics, History of, w: The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. P. Ed­wards, New York 1967.

Kuksewicz Z., Jan z Głogowa. Koncepcja duszy, „Studia Mediewistyczne” (1964) 6, s. 137–246.

Moody A. E., The Medieval Contribution to Logic, „Studium General” (1966) 19, s. 443–452.

Moreno A. S., Logica Medieval, „Sapientia” (1961) 16, s. 246–265.

Ockham W., Suma logiczna, przeł. T. Włodarczyk, Warszawa 1971.

Ockham G. de, Scriptum in libros Sententiarum seu Ordinatio, w: G. de Ockham, Opera philosophica et theologica, cura Instituti Franciscani, Universitatis S. Bonaventurae, Opera theologica, t. 3, ed. Ph. Boehner OFM, G. Gál OFM, S. Brown, New York 1977.

Ong W. J., Ramus, Method and the Decay of Dialogue: From the Art of Discourse to the Art of Reason, Chicago 2005.

Owens J., Judgment and Truth in Aquinas, „Mediaeval Studies” (1970) 32, s. 138–158.

Paź B., Epistemologiczne założenia Christiana Wolffa, Wrocław 2002.

Pinborg J., Logic und Semantik im Mittelalter. Ein Überblick, Stuttgart 1972.

Platon, Timaios, przeł. W. Witwicki, Kęty 2002.

Platon, Sofista, przeł. W. Witwicki, Kęty 2002.

Scholz H., Zarys historii logiki, przeł. M. Kurecka­‑Wirpszowa, Warszawa 1965.

Suárez F., De anima, w: Opera omnia, Editio nova, a C. Berton, t. 3, Parisiis 1851.

Suárez F., Disputationes metaphysicae, w: Opera Omnia, Editio nova, a C. Ber­ton, t. 25, Parisiis 1866.

Suárez F., Commentaria una cum quaestionibus in libros Aristotelis De Anima, Introducción y edición crítica por S. Castellote, t. 3, Madrid 1991.

Swieżawski S., Les intentions premières et les intentions secondaires chez Jean Duns Scotus, „Archives d’Histoire Doctrinale et Littéraire du Moyen Âge” (1934) 9, s. 205–260.

Tomasz z Akwinu św., Traktat o człowieku. Summa teologii I, 75–89, przeł. S. Swie­żawski, Kęty 1998.

Tomasz z Akwinu św., Kwestie dyskutowane o prawdzie, t. 1, przeł. A. Aduszkie­wicz, L. Kuczyński, J. Ruszczyński, Kęty 1998.

Tomasz z Akwinu św., De veritate. O prawdzie, przekł. A. Białek, tekst poprawili M. A. Krąpiec OP, A. Maryniarczyk SDB, Lublin 1999.

Waszkinel R., Przedmiot i podmiot w poznaniu według Jana od św. Tomasza, „Roczniki Filozoficzne” (1976) 24, z. 1, s. 31–45.

Wells N. J., „Esse cognitum” and Suárez Revisited, „American Catholic Philo­sophical Quarterly” (1993) 67, s. 339–348.

Wszystko to ze zdziwienia. Antologia tekstów filozoficznych XIV wieku, oprac. E. Jung­‑Palczewska, Warszawa 2000.

Venetus P., Logica Parva, First Critical Edition from The Manuscripts with Introduction and Commentary, transl. and ed. by A. R. Perreiah, Leiden–Boston–Köln 2002 (Münich 1984).

Downloads

Published

2017-08-01

Issue

Section

Articles