Luca Gili, “‘Quod Possibile Est Non Esse Quandoque Non Est’. Aquinas’ Third Way in the Light of Hintikka’s Principle of Plenitude,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 79, no. 1–2 (2023): 189–204, https://doi.org/10.17990/RPF/2023_79_1_0189.
| Item Type | Journal Article |
|---|---|
| Author | Luca Gili |
| Abstract | According to both Jaakko Hintikka and Simo Knuuttila, Aquinas’ third way to demonstrate that God exists presupposes the acceptance of the principle of plenitude, i.e., of the claim that all possibilities are realized at some time. Aquinas, however, maintained elsewhere that not all possibilities are always realized, and the coherence of his philosophical project may be called into question if one were to accept Hintikka’s and Knuuttila’s reading of the third way. In this paper, I argue that it is difficult to present the third way without invoking the principle of plenitude in Hintikka’s formulation. The corollary of this claim is that third way cannot be a demonstration within the philosophical system outlined by Aquinas, despite his claim to the contrary. Against the backdrop of this exegetical discussion, it is possible to rephrase Aquinas’ third way as a probabilistic argument that shows that God’s existence is highly likely, although not necessarily proven. |
| Date | 2023 |
| Language | English |
| Rights | © 2023 Aletheia - Associação Científica e Cultural |
| Volume | 79 |
| Pages | 189-204 |
| Publication | Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia |
| DOI | 10.17990/RPF/2023_79_1_0189 |
| Issue | 1-2 |
| ISSN | 0870-5283 ; 2183-461X |
| Date Added | 10/11/2023, 6:58:22 PM |
| Modified | 10/11/2023, 9:19:58 PM |
Aquinas, Thomas. Commentary on the Metaphysics of Aristotle. Volume II, translated by John P. Rowan. Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1961.
Aquinas, Thomas. The Summa theologica. Translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province. New York: Benziger Brothers, 1947.
Aristotle. The Complete Works of Aristotle. The Revised Oxford Translation, 2 volumes, edited by Jonathan Barnes. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.
Agostini, Igor. La démonstration de l’existence de Dieu. Les conclusions des cinq voies de Thomas d’Aquin et la preuve a priori dans le thomisme du XVIIe siècle. Turnhout: Brepols, 2016.
Cohoe, Caleb. “There Must Be a First: Why Thomas Aquinas Rejects Infinite, Essentially Ordered, Causal Series.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 2, no. 5 (2013): 838–56.
Gili, Luca, and Ferroni, Lorenzo. “Non-existent but potentially actual. Aristotle on plenitude (Met. Θ 3-4, 1047 b1-6).” Revue de philologie, de littérature et d’histoire anciennes 90, no. 1 (2016): 81-114.
Gram, Moltke, and Martin, Richard. “Hintikka contra Lovejoy.” Journal of the History of Ideas 4, no. 3 (1980): 497-511.
Hintikka, Jaakko. Time and Necessity. Studies in Aristotle’s Theory of Modality, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973.
Hintikka, Jaakko. “Gaps in the Great Chain of Being: An Exercise in the Methodology of the History of Ideas.” In Reforging the Great Chain of Being. Studies of the History of Modal Theories, edited by Simo Knuuttila, 1-17. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1980.
Kenny, Anthony. The Five Ways: St. Thomas Aquinas’s Proofs of God’s Existence. London: Routledge, 1969.
Knuuttila, Simo. “Time and Modality in Scholasticism.” In Reforging the Great Chain of Being. Studies of the History of Modal Theories, edited by Simo Knuuttila, 163-257. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1980.
Llano, Alejandro. “Aquinas and the Principle of Plenitude.” In Thomas Aquinas and His Legacy, edited by David M. Gallagher, 131-148. Washington DC: the Catholic University of America Press, 2004.
Lovejoy, Arthur Oncken. The Great Chain of Being. A Study of the History of an Idea, Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press, 1936.
Porro, Pasquale, Thomas Aquinas. A Historical and Philosophical Profile, translated by Joseph G. Trabbit and Roger W. Nutt, Washington DC: the Catholic University of America Press, 2016.
