/
Search results


Вдовина Г. В. Доказательства существования Бога в "Метафизических рассуждениях" Франсиско Суареса // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. Религиоведение. 2017. Вып. 73. С. 69-82. DOI: 10.15382/sturI201773.69-82
The article considers arguments for the existence of God that are presented in Francisco Suarez’ treatise Metaphysical Disputations. The work of Suarez contains the most developed and detailed exposition of natural theology that exists in the scholastic tradition. Suarez explicitates the problem, formulating three questions: what is a being that we call God? Is it possible to prove or justify his existence? How is it possible? Suarez answers the first question by showing that we come to a concept of the prime and excellent being through a series of divisions in the concept of being. That prime being is infinite, absolute, necessary and uncreated. The second question is answered by the procedure of that division and its result. In his answer to the third question, Suarez distinguishes physical and metaphysical arguments. According to Suarez, the most significant physical proofs are the argument from motion and the argument from the rational soul. Nevertheless, he demonstrates that purely physical arguments cannot lead us to a being, which we call God. Only metaphysical argument from the principle, everything which is produced, is produces by something else, is really effective. The logic of the metaphysical proof is as follows: first, we have to demonstrate the necessary existence of the first non-produced thing: secondly, we are to show that such a thing can only be one. The first point is proved through the demonstration of an absolutely first cause in each series of causes, the second one is made evident through a demonstration of the impossibility to coexist simultaneously for two equally perfect first causes of equal causing power.
Suarez, Metaphusical Disputations, natural theology, scholasticism, arguments for the existence of God, physical arguments, metaphysical arguments, first being, first cause, perfection of first cause, the uniqueness of first cause
  1. Cantens B., “Suárez’s Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God”, in: Schwartz D., ed., Interpreting Suárez: Critical Essays, Cambridge, 2012, 89–114.
  2. Doyle J. P., trans., ed., Suárez F. The Metaphysical Demonstration of the Existence of God. Metaphysical Disputations, 28–29, South Bend, 2004.
  3. Fastiggi R., “The Proof for the Existence of God in Suarez”, in: Cardoso A. e.a., ed., Francisco Suárez (1548–1617): tradição e modernidade, Lisbonne, 1999, 81–92.
  4. Lupandin I. V., “«Metafizicheskie rassuzhdenija» Fransisko Suaresa i zarozhdenie novoevropejskoj filosofii”, at. avialeble: http://www.krotov.info/lib_sec/12_l/lup/andin_30.html (18.08.2017).
  5. Makarova I. V., transl., “Suares F. Kommentarij na traktat Aristotelja “O dushe” (III. 9 — rassuzhdenie o sposobnostjah intellekta)”, in: Istoriko-filosofskij ezhegodnik, 2013, 2014, 102–125.
  6. Makarova I. V., “Fransisko Suares: problema poznanij a otdelennyh substancij i uchenie ob aktivnom intellekte”, in: Istoriko-filosofskij ezhegodnik, 2013, 2014, 86–101.
  7. Makarova I. V., “Poznavaemy li edinichnye veshhi? (Aristotel’ i F. Suares o edinichnom)”, in: Voprosy filosofii, 1, 2016, 119–131.
  8. Makarova I. V., “Uchenie F. Suaresa o dushe i ego rol’ v diskussii ob aktivnom ume”, in: Ivanova Ju. V., ed., Polemicheskaja kul’tura i struktura nauchnogo teksta v Srednie veka i rannee Novoe vremja, Moscow, 2012, 174–195.
  9. Savinov R. V., “Problema genezisa «Indeksa» k Disputationes Metaphysicae Fransisko Suaresa”, in: Istina i dialog. Sbornik materialov XIII Svjato-Troickih ezhegodnyh mezhdunarodnyh akademicheskih chtenij v Sankt-Peterburge, St. Petersbourg, 2013, 211–212.
  10. Shmonin D. V., Fokus metafiziki. Porjadok bytija i opyt poznanija v filosofii Fransisko Suaresa, Saint Petersbourg, 2002.
  11. Shmonin D. V., V teni Renessansa: vtoraja sholastika v Ispanii, St. Petersbourg, 2006.
  12. Vdovina G., transl., ed., Suares F. O rechi angelov, Moscow, 2017.
  13. Vdovina G. V., transl., “Suares F. Metafizicheskoe rassuzhdenie VI O formal’nom i universal’nom edinstve IV–VI”, in: Esse, 1. 2 (2), 2016, 235–249.
  14. Vdovina G. V., transl., Ivanov V. L., ed., “Suares F. Metafi zicheskie Rassuzhdenij a. Rassuzhdenie VI O formal’nom i universal’nom edinstve I–III”, in: EINAI: Problemy filosofii i teologii, 4.1/2 (7/8), 2015, 213–271.
  15. Wieman F. J., Suarez and the Infinity of God. Master’s Theses (1946). Paper 424, at. available: http://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/424 (23.08.2017).
Vdovina Galina
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Place of work: Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences; Goncharnaya Str. 12/1, Moscow 109240, Russian Federation;
Post: Leading Research Fellow;
ORCID: 0000-0003-3220-924X;
Email: galvd1@yandex.ru. *According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.
The article is written within the framework of the project № 15-03-00211 "Metaphysics in the intercultural space: history and modernity" supported by RFBR Foundation
Вдовина Г. В. Понятие блага в «Метафизических рассуждениях» Франсиско Суареса // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. Религиоведение. 2018. Вып. 78. С. 93-106. DOI: 10.15382/sturI201878.93-106
The concept of Good (bonum) is one of the most complicated and multifaceted concepts in the philosophical and theological European tradition. Disputationes Metaphysicae by Francisco Suá rez (1548‒1617) treat it strictly from the point of view of the First Philosophy, namely as one of the transcendental, i.e. supracategorical, attributes of Being as such. Therefore, the problem of Good in Suá rez’ view is elevated from the level of practical philosophy (ethics) to a higher level of contemplative philosophy (metaphysics). Suá rez attempts, fi rstly, to reveal the nature of Good as such; secondly, to relate all kinds of Good — despite their apparent heterogeneity — to the transcendental Good as the highest and primordial form of bonum; thirdly, to explain the mututal convertibility of Good and Being. Suá rez solves this task through the conceptual analysis of the particular kinds of Good and through identifi cation of analogical relations between them.
The concept of good in Francisco Sua rez’ Disputationes Metaphysicae
  1. Augustine of Hippo (1995) De doctrina Сhristiana. Oxford.
  2. Burlando G. (2016) “Bien trascendental: salvación y comunidad fuerte en F. Suárez”. Teología y vida, 2016, vol. 57 (3), pp. 309–333.
  3. Darge R. (2014) “Zum historischen Hintergrund der Transzendentalienlehre in den Disputationes Metaphysicae”, in Novák L. (ed.) Suárez’s Metaphysics in its Historical and Systematic Context, Berlin, vol. 2, pp. 39–62.
  4. Esposito C. (2004) “Ens, essentia, bonum en la metafísica de Francisco Suárez”. Azafea. Revista de Filosofía, 2004, vol. 6, pp. 29–47.
  5. Fokin A. R. (2009) “Blago v zapadnom srednevekovom bogoslovii” [“Good in Western Medieval Theology”]. In Pravoslavnaia Entsiklopediia [Orthodox Encyclopedia], Moscow, 2009, vol. 5. pp. 239–243 (in Russian).
  6. Honnefelder L. (1987) “Der zweite Anfang der Metaphysik: Voraussetzungen, Ansätze und Folgen der Wiederbegründung der Metaphysik im 13./14. Jahrhundert”, in Beckmann J. P., Honnefelder L., Schrimpf G., Wieland G. (eds.) Philosophie im Mittelalter. Entwicklungslinien und Paradigmen. Hamburg, pp. 165–186.
  7. Suárez F. Disputationes Metaphysicae. Available at: http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Michael.Renemann/suarez/suarez_dm10.html (30. 04. 2018).
  8. Thomas Aquinas. Summa theologiae. Available at: http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/sth1003.html (23. 04. 2018).
Vdovina Galina
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Philosophy;
Place of work: Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences; Goncharnaya Str. 12/1, Moscow 109240, Russian Federation;
Post: Leading Research Fellow;
ORCID: 0000-0003-3220-924X;
Email: galvd1@yandex.ru. *According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.