Thomas Aquinas against Avicenna: The Origin of the Forms and the Subsistence of the Singular Substance

Mostrar todas las versiones(2)

Avicenna's influence on Thomas Aquinas's work is undeniable. Some of his fundamental metaphysical notions are based on Avicennian formulas, which does not prevent him from criticizing severely diverse aspects of the Avicennian doctrine of creation. In several moments of his work, Thomas cr...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Castello Dubra, Julio Antonio
Formato: Artículo publishedVersion
Lenguaje:Español
Publicado: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires 2008
Materias:
Ser concreto
substancia compuesta
acción
forma
causas segundas
Concrete being
Composite substances
Agency
Form
Secondary causes
Acceso en línea:https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/petm/article/view/7820
https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=patris&d=7820_oai
Aporte de:
Repositorio Digital de la Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBA) de Universidad de Buenos Aires
id I28-R145-7820_oai
record_format dspace
spelling I28-R145-7820_oai2025-11-17 Castello Dubra, Julio Antonio 2008-06-02 Avicenna's influence on Thomas Aquinas's work is undeniable. Some of his fundamental metaphysical notions are based on Avicennian formulas, which does not prevent him from criticizing severely diverse aspects of the Avicennian doctrine of creation. In several moments of his work, Thomas criticizes, in particular, Avicenna's doctrine according to which the forms of the entities of the sublunary world flow from a superior Intelligence (the dator formarum). Thomas attributes this doctrine to the disability to explain the origin of forms other than by creation. The true solution presupposes, according to Thomas, analyze the generation of composite substances following the Aristotelian principles (Met. VII, 8): what is properly generated is what properly exists, that is to say, not the form, but the compound. Thomas applies this solution to the polemic about the capacity of natural bodies to act – in other terms about the efficiency of secondary causes– and to the question whether creation is mixed within the works of nature – that is to say, whether any created nature at all can create–. In synthesizing the Aristotelian ontology of the primary substance and the creationist metaphysics, Thomas has betted for the subsistence of concrete beings in the world of natural experience. La influencia de Avicena en la obra de Tomás de Aquino es innegable. Varias de sus fundamentales nociones metafísicas se basan en fórmulas avicenianas. Esto, sin embargo, no impide que Tomás critique severamente diversos aspectos de la doctrina de la creación de Avicena. En varios espacios de su obra Tomás critica, en particular, la doctrina aviceniana que sostiene que las formas de las entidades del mundo sublunar emanan desde una Inteligencia superior (el dator formarum). Tomás atribuye esta doctrina a la invalidez de explicar el origen de las formas de otra forma que no sea la creación. La verdadera solución presupone, sostiene Tomás, analizar la generación de las substancias compuestas siguiendo los principios aristotélicos (Met. VII, 8): lo que es generado propiamente, es lo que propiamente existe, y esto no es la forma, sino el compuesto. Tomás aplica esta solución en la polémica respecto a la capacidad de los cuerpos naturales para actuar –en otros términos, acerca de la eficiencia de las causas segundas– y respecto a la cuestión acerca de si la creación es mixta al interior de las obras de la naturaleza –esto es, si cualquier creatura creada puede crear–. Al sintetizar la ontología aristotélica de la substancia primera y la metafísica creacionista, Tomás apostó por la subsitencia de los seres concretos en el mundo de la experiencia natural. application/pdf https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/petm/article/view/7820 spa Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/petm/article/view/7820/6882 Patristica et Mediævalia; Vol. 29 (2008); 33-42 2683-9636 Ser concreto substancia compuesta acción forma causas segundas Concrete being Composite substances Agency Form Secondary causes Thomas Aquinas against Avicenna: The Origin of the Forms and the Subsistence of the Singular Substance Tomás de Aquino contra Avicena: el origen de las formas y la subsistencia de la substancia singular info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=patris&d=7820_oai
institution Universidad de Buenos Aires
institution_str I-28
repository_str R-145
collection Repositorio Digital de la Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBA)
language Español
orig_language_str_mv spa
topic Ser concreto
substancia compuesta
acción
forma
causas segundas
Concrete being
Composite substances
Agency
Form
Secondary causes
spellingShingle Ser concreto
substancia compuesta
acción
forma
causas segundas
Concrete being
Composite substances
Agency
Form
Secondary causes
Castello Dubra, Julio Antonio
Thomas Aquinas against Avicenna: The Origin of the Forms and the Subsistence of the Singular Substance
topic_facet Ser concreto
substancia compuesta
acción
forma
causas segundas
Concrete being
Composite substances
Agency
Form
Secondary causes
description Avicenna's influence on Thomas Aquinas's work is undeniable. Some of his fundamental metaphysical notions are based on Avicennian formulas, which does not prevent him from criticizing severely diverse aspects of the Avicennian doctrine of creation. In several moments of his work, Thomas criticizes, in particular, Avicenna's doctrine according to which the forms of the entities of the sublunary world flow from a superior Intelligence (the dator formarum). Thomas attributes this doctrine to the disability to explain the origin of forms other than by creation. The true solution presupposes, according to Thomas, analyze the generation of composite substances following the Aristotelian principles (Met. VII, 8): what is properly generated is what properly exists, that is to say, not the form, but the compound. Thomas applies this solution to the polemic about the capacity of natural bodies to act – in other terms about the efficiency of secondary causes– and to the question whether creation is mixed within the works of nature – that is to say, whether any created nature at all can create–. In synthesizing the Aristotelian ontology of the primary substance and the creationist metaphysics, Thomas has betted for the subsistence of concrete beings in the world of natural experience.
format Artículo
publishedVersion
author Castello Dubra, Julio Antonio
author_facet Castello Dubra, Julio Antonio
author_sort Castello Dubra, Julio Antonio
title Thomas Aquinas against Avicenna: The Origin of the Forms and the Subsistence of the Singular Substance
title_short Thomas Aquinas against Avicenna: The Origin of the Forms and the Subsistence of the Singular Substance
title_full Thomas Aquinas against Avicenna: The Origin of the Forms and the Subsistence of the Singular Substance
title_fullStr Thomas Aquinas against Avicenna: The Origin of the Forms and the Subsistence of the Singular Substance
title_full_unstemmed Thomas Aquinas against Avicenna: The Origin of the Forms and the Subsistence of the Singular Substance
title_sort thomas aquinas against avicenna: the origin of the forms and the subsistence of the singular substance
publisher Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires
publishDate 2008
url https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/petm/article/view/7820
https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=patris&d=7820_oai
work_keys_str_mv AT castellodubrajulioantonio thomasaquinasagainstavicennatheoriginoftheformsandthesubsistenceofthesingularsubstance
AT castellodubrajulioantonio tomasdeaquinocontraavicenaelorigendelasformasylasubsistenciadelasubstanciasingular
_version_ 1851375452892954624

Ejemplares similares