I have been woefully remiss in my blogging duties, for which I apologize to both my readers.
Here’s a philosophical question to ponder: does Aquinas’ statement in the S.Th. I, q1, art 1 “It was necessary for man’s salvation that there should be a knowledge revealed by God besides philosophical science built up by human reason” hold true when stated conversely: “It was necessary for man’s salvation that there should be philosophical science built up by human reason besides a knowledge revealed by God”?
Let me know in the combox.
Syzygus 
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 28, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Reginald de Piperno
I have been woefully remiss in my blogging duties, for which I apologize to both my readers.
Speaking as one of them, all is forgiven 🙂
It is very good to see a post from you again!
I will have to get back to you with an attempt at an answer to your question, however.
December 29, 2009 at 9:40 pm
syzygus
I look forward to it, Reg. It’s good to be back. I expect to post more this week. Enjoying your series on Trent’s canons very much.
January 1, 2010 at 12:28 pm
Reginald de Piperno
Question: “It was necessary for man’s salvation that there should be philosophical science built up by human reason besides a knowledge revealed by God.”
It seems not. First, this would mean that all men would have to attain to this philosophical knowledge in order to be saved. But the attainment of philosophical knowledge is difficult, as St. Thomas says, and consequently not everyone is able to attain to it. Besides this difficulty, to which even the most gifted of men are subject, such a necessity would also be beyond the powers of most men, who lack the gifts—both in terms of their intellectual capacities and other resources such as time and educational attainment—to be able to acquire this knowledge. And it is these difficulties that St. Thomas says are overcome by means of the revealed knowledge of God.
Okay, that’s my first effort. 🙂
RdP
January 1, 2010 at 5:59 pm
Dim Bulb
Necessity is of many kinds. It is: (a) absolute; (b) hypothetical, which is either physical or moral.
A thing is said to be necessary for the end in two ways. First, as indispensable for the attainment of the end (ad esse simpliciter), and this is called physical necessity, as in the case of food for the preservation of human life. Secondly, a thing is said to be necessary for the convenient attainment of the end (ad bene esse), as in the case of a horse for a long journey, for otherwise there would be great difficulty in attaining the end, though it would not be a physical impossibility.
The statement of Aquinas: “It was necessary for man’s salvation that there should be a knowledge revealed by God besides philosophical science built up by human reason” is a hypothetical necessity for the convenient attainment of the end (ad bene esse).
I would suggest that the converse advanced by Syzygus is the same. “But the Muslims and the pagans accept neither the one nor the other (i.e., truths of the Old and New Testaments). We must, therefore, have recourse to the natural reason, to which all men are forced to give their assent. However, it is true, in divine matters the natural reason has its failings.” (SCG Bk. I, Ch. II)
January 26, 2010 at 11:43 pm
Reginald de Piperno
Wow! I like the new theme! 🙂
(It seems more appropriate to remark about this here than in the post concerning your grandfather, may he rest in peace)
RdP
January 28, 2010 at 9:42 pm
syzygus
Thank you! I like it too. And the tagline for the header finally shows up!