Subject:

Comments:
: Dear Sir(s): : I have a few questions regarding scholastic terms and sources. : Firstly, what is the difference between Plato and Aristotle and Augustine and Aquinas as far as form, essence, matter, universals, and accidents. : Secondly, St. Thomas in the SUMMA THEOLOGICA writes in what is called "the scholastic method" , meaning it is has parts and then questions with articles. : Now my question is the method he uses, e.g. : : ============================================================= : We must now consider X, under which head there are three points of inquiry: : (1) Whether X = A ? : (2) Whether X = B ? : (3) Whether X = C ? : Question (1): Whether X = A ? : We proceed thus to the First Article: : Objection. 1. It seems that, X = not A for: : (i.) X = Y ... But ... : (ii.) Y = not A ... Therefore ... : (iii.) X = not A. : Obj. 2. Further, X = not A for: : (i.) A = Y ... But ... : (ii.) Y = not X ... Therefore ... : (iii.) X = not A. : [comment: is the sed contra est deduction or reduction?) : Sed contra est, X = A for: : (i.) X = Y ... But ... : (ii.) Y = A ... Therefore ... : (iii.) X = A. : [ comment by me: this is the part of method (respondeo) that I feel I need help in, is this reduction or deduction? ] : Respondeo, X = A, as shown above, since: : 1. X = Y for: : (i.) X = J ... But ... : (ii.) J = Y ... Therefore ... : (iii.) X = Y : 2. BUT, Y = A for: : (i.) Y = J ... But ... : (ii.) J = A ... Therefore ... : (iii.) Y = A : 3. THEREFORE, X = A : Reply to Obj. 1. X = A, as shown above. The conclusion ( X = not A ) fails because the minor premise ( Y = not A) is false since Y = A for: : (i.) Y = J ... But ... : (ii.) J = A ... Therefore ... : (iii.) Y = A : Resolutio: X = A for: : (i.) X = Y ... But ... : (ii.) Y = A ... Therefore ... : (iii.) X = A. : Reply to Obj. 2. X = A, as shown above. The conclusion ( X = not A ) fails because the minor premise ( Y = not X) is false since Y = X for: : (i.) Y = J ... But ... : (ii.) J = A ... Therefore ... : (iii.) Y = A : Resolutio: X = A for: : (i.) A = Y... But ... : (ii.) Y = X ... Therefore ... : (iii.) X = A. : ========================================= : (where does the causes fit???) : 1. Material cause, the matter out of which a thing is made : 2. Formal cause, which is the species, kind, or type : 3. Efficient cause, the source of motion, generation, or change : 4. Final cause, the goal, or full development person's entelechy. : ======= : Where does one get or find (via web or elsewhere) a dictionary of scholastic terms defining and quoting where they are derived, e.g. the terms person, nature, essence, form, universal, cause, mode, substance, object, subject, external, internal, explicit, implicit, soul, animal, man, good, evil, taste, sense, et al??? : e.g. : term = "definition" (Author: source of work, publ, yr., vol., pp.) : nature = " ...." (Aristotle: .......) : person = "......" (Boethius:......) : Please do help, thanks. : Sincerely in St. Anselm, : Patrick J. Pollock : thethomist@aol.com : P.S. What is the difference between: : reductio, deductio, inductio, determinatio, disputatio, resolutio, resolutio-compositio...? : Click here: Categorical Syllogism : Does any other author beside St. Thomas Aquinas use this scholastic method??? : 1. Consideration of the question and the articles thereof. : 2. Article. : 3. objections. : 4. sed contra est : 5. respondeo : 6. reply to objections.

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[Nantuckets.com][BusinessPhilosophy.com][Classicals.com] [Nantucket Poetry Postcards]
[Nantucket Navy Live Chat][The Jolly Roger][Kill Devil Hill][Western Canon University][Federalistnavy.com Spirit of America]
[Starbuck.com Classical Poetry Port] [Kill Devil Hill] [Shakespearean Greetings]
[Conservative Cafe][nantucketnavy.com][hatteraslight.com]
StThomashall Scholastic Method of Angelic Doctor: Nantucket Campfire

StThomashall Nantucket Campfire
StThomashall & Other Nantucket Live Chats
If ye would like to moderate the StThomashall Nantucket Campfire, please drop nantucket@nantuckets.com a line.