Aquinas and ontotheology again
A number of contemporary authors have argued that Aquinas’s understanding of God is ontotheological. In this paper, I consider the charge as it is formulated by Kevin Hart in his influential book The Trespass of the Sign: Deconstruction, Theology, and Philosophy. Hart claims that three features of A...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic/Print Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis
[2016]
|
| In: |
International journal of philosophy and theology
Year: 2016, Volume: 77, Issue: 1/2, Pages: 45-61 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Thomas Aquinas 1225-1274
/ Ontotheology
|
| IxTheo Classification: | AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism NBC Doctrine of God VA Philosophy |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | A number of contemporary authors have argued that Aquinas’s understanding of God is ontotheological. In this paper, I consider the charge as it is formulated by Kevin Hart in his influential book The Trespass of the Sign: Deconstruction, Theology, and Philosophy. Hart claims that three features of Aquinas’s approach to the divine make it ontotheological, namely that it (1) privileges positive theology over negative theology, (2) regards God as the "highest value", and (3) takes God to be the essence of beings. I argue that these features are either not to be found in Aquinas’s thinking about God or that Hart misunderstands them. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2169-2327 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: International journal of philosophy and theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2016.1185956 |