トマスにおける能動知性と抽象

スポンサーリンク

概要

• 論文の詳細を見る

• In what sense did Aquinas use 'the agent intellect' and its operation, called 'abstraction'? In his theory of human understanding, it is necessary to posit an agent intellect. For he thought that proper human intellect is the possible intellect, which could not understand things unless it might be moved by an intelligible object. However, such an intelligible objecct does not have real existence because it is already abstracted in the process of cognition. Therefore, in order to make the intelligible objects to be real we have to posit an agent intellect. Aquinas gives explanations of supposing an agent intellect. But we may find some differences between Summa Theologiae (I. Q. 79. a. 4) and De Aniwa (Q. 4), and the operation of abstraction has neither univocal meaning nor unique mode. For instance, one mode of abstraction means "separation" and the other "generalization". I don't intend to give the complete answer to above ambiguities here. I only show that ontological and analogical ways of thoughts are mixed together and used interchangeably in his books.

• 慶應義塾大学の論文

著者

• 中山 浩二郎

  慶應義塾大学

関連論文

• 三田哲学を語る(文学部創設百周年記念論文集I)
• 三田哲学と私(3)(文学部創設百周年記念論文集I)
• トマスにおける能動知性と抽象
• 認識者の様式と思惟の形式について(橋本孝先生古希記念論文集)
• 「受けとるもの」と「受けとられるもの」
• 感覚的認識について
• 認識の対象に関する一考察(I 哲学,慶応義塾創立百年記念論文集)

スポンサーリンク