• We draw out the line of argument in Avicenna according to which being in act (wujūd bi-l-fi‘l) is not in the definitional content of the ten categories. With the help of al-Ghazālī’s Metaphysica, Aquinas in his earliest writings turns this line into what has been misnamed the “Genus Argument” for the real distinction between essence and existence (esse in actu). Aquinas, as we show, draws on the Avicennian “Categories Argument” in his treatment of the possibility of substance-less accidents unde…Read more
  •  7
    Back to Nature in Aquinas
    Medieval Philosophy & Theology 5 (2): 205-243. 1996.
  •  23
    Aquinas’ so-called “Intellectus essentiae Argument” for the distinction between being and essence is notoriously suspect, including among defenders of Aquinas’ distinction. For the paper in this volume, I take as my starting point the recent defense of the argument by Fr. Lawrence Dewan, O.P. Fr. Dewan’s project is unsuccessful. Pointing out some shortcomings in his readings allows me to take up his call to highlight the “formal” or “quidditative side” of Aquinas’ metaphysics, in this case in re…Read more
  • Scholars dispute regarding how Aquinas employs the Aristotelian material lying behind his well-known proof of God's existence from motion, the Summa theologiae's 'first way'. The dispute focuses on Aquina's account of this material in Contra gentiles I.13. Aquinas apparently adopts there a 'theory of subordination' by which Aristotle's Physics demonstrates a prime mover that is merely an immanent celestial soul, whereas Aristotle's Metaphysics reasons further to a prior, exclusively final cause …Read more
  •  21
    Presentation of the Aquinas Medal
    Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 83 15-17. 2009.
  •  15
    American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 662
    American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 85 (4). 2011.
  •  6
    Presentation of the Aquinas Medal
    Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 83 15-17. 2009.
  •  1
    Albert the Great, Double Truth, and Celestial Causality
    Documenti E Studi Sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale 12 275-358. 2001.
    L'A. sostiene, contro la maggioranza degli altri interpreti, l'ipotesi che Alberto Magno assegni tre cause al movimento delle sfere celesti: la causa prima, un intelletto e un'anima della sfera. Tale dottrina, pur diversa da quella dei pensatori arabi, presuppone, secondo l'A., la conoscenza di questi, in particolare di Averroè. Si sottolinea poi il legame che Alberto instaura fra filosofia e teologia, diverso da quello proposto da Tommaso e Bonaventura, ma anche da quello di Sigieri e di Boezio…Read more
  •  99
    On Which 'God' Should Be the Target of a 'Proof of God's Existence'
    The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 8 75-80. 2006.
    Philosophers of religion debate what is meant by the word 'God,' in the conclusion of proofs of God's existence. If'God' is a proper name, there seems to be no good proof that a non-empirical entity has this name. If it is a common name, it seems that it must mean what classical theists mean by 'God' - and the existence of such a being is hard to prove. I defend a third possibility: that 'God' names a common name that is the least prescriptive possible, while being sufficient to signify one kind…Read more
  •  7
    With his clear and accessible prose, impeccable scholarship, and balanced Judgment, Roland Teske, SJ, has been an influential and important voice in Medieval philosophy for more than thirty years. This volume, in his honour, brings together more than a dozen essays on central metaphysical and theological themes in Augustine and other medieval thinkers. The authors, listed below, are noted scholars who draw upon Teskes work, reflect on it, go beyond it, and at times even disagree with it, but alw…Read more
  •  1
    Albert the Great on Whether Natural Philosophy Proves God’s Existence
    Archives d'Histoire Doctrinale et Littéraire du Moyen Âge 64 7-58. 1997.
    Contrary to the prevailing view, Albert agrees with Avicenna that the existence of God is not proved by any science but metaphysics. Physics concludes merely to a first immobile cause intrinsic to what it moves, an intellectual being “conjoined” to the heavens: the “soul” of the outermost sphere. This doctrine, which is developed in Albert’s aristotelian paraphrases, is at least consistent with, if not also accepted within, Albert’s own thought
  •  1
    Causality and Emanation in Albert
    with Isabelle Moulin
  •  13
    On Which 'God' Should Be the Target of a 'Proof of God's Existence'
    The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 8 75-80. 2006.
    Philosophers of religion debate what is meant by the word 'God,' in the conclusion of proofs of God's existence. If'God' is a proper name, there seems to be no good proof that a non-empirical entity has this name. If it is a common name, it seems that it must mean what classical theists mean by 'God' - and the existence of such a being is hard to prove. I defend a third possibility: that 'God' names a common name that is the least prescriptive possible, while being sufficient to signify one kind…Read more
  •  9
    Back to Nature in Aquinas
    Medieval Philosophy & Theology 5 (2): 205-243. 1996.