Ni lo mismo ni lo otro: Sobre conocimiento y semejanza en la noética de Tomás de Aquino: Antecedentes agustinianos, debates actuales

Otros responsables
Fecha
11/2014
Editorial
Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Centro de Estudios Filosóficos Medievales
Revista
Scripta Mediaevalia
Título del libro
Nombre del evento
Fecha del evento
Institución organizadora
ISSN
1851-8753
eISSN
ISBN
Idioma
Español
Tipo del evento
Clasificación temática
Palabras clave
Resumen
La noción de semejanza - similitudo - suele resultarle útil a Tomás de Aquino para explicar en qué consiste conocer. Recurre a ella para describir qué es la especie tanto inteligible como sensible así como el verbo mental. Sin embargo, el protagonismo de esta noción lleva anejos, al menos, dos problemas. Frecuentemente los especialistas pretenden explicarlo postulando un presunto precedente aristotélico. No obstante, examinada cuidadosamente, la obra del Estagirita proporciona escasas apariciones de la noción. En este trabajo examino la viabilidad de un precedente agustiniano para las recurrentes semejanzas del Aquinate. Y hay un segundo problema. ¿Cómo conciliar estas preponderantes semejanzas con el supuesto realismo directo que canónicamente se le ha imputado a Tomás? Con respecto a esto, critico algunas interpretaciones que anulan la semejanza tomándola como mero sinónimo de la identidad simpliciter. Finalmente, argumento la tesis de que, según Tomás, la eficacia noética de la semejanza estriba más en la diferencia que en la identidad.
The notion of likeness - similitudo - is often useful to Aquinas to explain what is to know. He uses it to describe what is the species both intelligible and sensible as well as the mental word. However, the leading role of this notion involves at least two problems. Scholars often seek to explain it by postulating an Aristotelian possible precedent. However, carefully examined, the work of Aristotle provides rare appearances of this concept. In this paper I examine the feasibility of an Augustinian precedent as a cause of recurring likenesses in Aquinas. And there is a second problem. How to reconcile these overarching likenesses with the alleged direct realism canonically attributed to Aquinas? Regarding this, I criticise some interpretations that nullify likeness taking it as a mere synonym of identity simpliciter. Finally, I argue that, according to Aquinas, the epistemological efficacy of likeness is based on the difference rather than on the identity.
The notion of likeness - similitudo - is often useful to Aquinas to explain what is to know. He uses it to describe what is the species both intelligible and sensible as well as the mental word. However, the leading role of this notion involves at least two problems. Scholars often seek to explain it by postulating an Aristotelian possible precedent. However, carefully examined, the work of Aristotle provides rare appearances of this concept. In this paper I examine the feasibility of an Augustinian precedent as a cause of recurring likenesses in Aquinas. And there is a second problem. How to reconcile these overarching likenesses with the alleged direct realism canonically attributed to Aquinas? Regarding this, I criticise some interpretations that nullify likeness taking it as a mere synonym of identity simpliciter. Finally, I argue that, according to Aquinas, the epistemological efficacy of likeness is based on the difference rather than on the identity.
Colecciones
Aprobación
Revisión
Complementado por
Referenciado por
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto donde se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este ítem se describe como by-nc-sa
