Duns Scotus has a remarkably unique and comprehensive theory concerning the nature of justice. Alas, commentators on his work have yet to full flesh out the details. Here, we begin the process of doing so, focusing primarily on his metaethical views on justice, i.e., what justice is or amounts to. While Scotus’s most detailed account of justice can be found in his Ordinatio, we find further specifics emerging in a number of other contexts and works. We argue that Scotus (...) offers a unique contribution in the history of philosophy: justice in God is a formality, in humans a virtue, and when attributed to actions, a relation. Even though formalities, virtues, and relations are ontologically distinct items, each can satisfy Scotus’s preferred Anselmian definition of justice—rectitude of will preserved for its own sake—since each characterizes a will aimed at rendering to goodness what is its due. (shrink)

An English translation of John Duns Scotus's The Questions on Aristotle's "De Interpretatione" including an extensive commentary on some of Scotus's more difficult ideas.

The philosophical writings of Duns Scotus, one of the most influential philosophers of the Later Middle Ages, are here presented in a volume that presents the original Latin with facing page English translation._ CONTENTS: _ Foreword to the Second Edition. Preface. Introduction. Select Bibliography. I. Concerning Metaphysics II. Man’s Natural Knowledge of God III. The Existence of God IV. The Unicity of God V. Concerning Human Knowledge VI. The Spirituality and Immortality of the Human Soul Notes. Index of Proper (...) Names. Index of Subjects. (shrink)

Scotus - unlike Thomas Aquinas - never commented on Aristotle's Politics nor did he write any significant political tracts like Ockham. Nevertheless, despite his primary philosophical reputation as a metaphysician, Scotus did have certain definitive ideas about both politics and the morality of the marketplace.

This work is the first English translation of Scotus's commentary on Aristotle's Quaestiones super Praedicamenta. Although there are numerous Latin commentaries on Aristotle's Categories, Scotus's Questions is one of the few commentaries on the Categories written in the thirteenth century covering all of Aristotle's text, including the often neglected post-praedicamenta, and the only complete Latin commentary available in English. Moreover, unlike many of the commentaries, Scotus's text is one of the last commentaries to be written before the nominalist reduction of (...) the categories to substance and quality. The question format allows Scotus a great deal of liberty to discuss the categories in detail, as well as matters that are only remotely raised by the text. Altogether, the forty-four questions cover the following subjects: questions 1-4 are prolegomena to the work itself and raise the question of its subject matter as well as whether there can be a science of the categories; questions 5-8 deal with equivocals, univocals, and denominatives; questions 9-11 discuss Aristotle's two rules regarding predication and the sufficiency of the categories; questions 12-36 discuss the four main categories treated by Aristotle, namely, substance, quantity, relation, and quality; and the remaining eight questions discuss the post-praedicamenta. (shrink)

The philosophical writings of Duns Scotus, one of the most influential philosophers of the Later Middle Ages, are here presented in a volume that presents the original Latin with facing page English translation. CONTENTS: Foreword to the Second Edition. Preface. Introduction. Select Bibliography. I. Concerning Metaphysics II. Man's Natural Knowledge of God III. The Existence of God IV. The Unicity of God V. Concerning Human Knowledge VI. The Spirituality and Immortality of the Human Soul Notes. Index of Proper Names. (...) Index of Subjects. (shrink)

Thomas Williams presents the most extensive collection of John Duns Scotus's work on ethics and moral psychology available in English. John Duns Scotus: Selected Writings on Ethics includes extended discussions-and as far as possible, complete questions-on divine and human freedom, the moral attributes of God, the relationship between will and intellect, moral and intellectual virtue, practical reasoning, charity, the metaphysics of goodness and rightness, the various acts, affections, and passions of the will, justice, the natural law, sin, marriage (...) and divorce, the justification for private property, and lying and perjury. 00Relying on the recently completed critical edition of the Ordinatio and other critically edited texts, this collection presents the most reliable and up-to-date versions of Scotus's work in an accessible and philosophically informed translation. (shrink)

This volume is the fifth and final volume in the Blessed John Duns Scotus Opera philosophica series. It offers readers Scotus' questions on Aristotle's De anima wherein he focuses his attention upon the faculties of sensation, the nature of the intellect, the role of the intelligible species in cognition, and the formal object of the intellect.

Richard Cross provides the first full study of Duns Scotus's theory of cognition, examining his account of the processes involved in cognition, from sensation, through intuition and abstraction, to conceptual thought. Cross places Scotus's thought clearly within the context of 13th-century study on the mind, and of his intellectual forebears.

Duns Scotus's Doctrine of Categories and Meaning is a key text for the origins of Martin Heidegger's concept of "facticity." Originally submitted as a doctoral thesis in 1915, it focuses on the 13th-century philosopher-theologian John Duns Scotus. Heidegger first analyzes Scotus's doctrine of categories, then offers a meticulous explanation of the Grammatica Speculativa, a work of medieval grammar now known to be authored by the Modist grammarian Thomas of Erfurt. Taken together, these investigations represent an early foray into (...) Heidegger's lifelong philosophical concerns, "the question of being in the guise of the problem of categories and the question of language in the guise of the doctrine of meaning." This new and unique translation of one of Heidegger's earliest works offers an important look at his early thinking before the question of being became his central concern and will appeal to readers exploring Heidegger's philosophical development, medieval philosophy, phenomenological interpretations of the history of philosophy, and the philosophy of language. (shrink)

In this paper, I argue that that three of Duns Scotus’s most controversial philosophical positions, namely, his doctrine of the univocity of the concept of being, his radical voluntarism, and his formal distinction between the soul and its powers, are related in the following way: The latter two depend upon the former, sometimes in obvious ways that Duns Scotus owns, and sometimes in ways that are not licensed by the doctrine of the univocity of the concept of being (...) as Scotus himself claims to employ it. In particular, I argue that in Scotus’s development of his theory of freedom and his understanding of the powers of the soul, he makes inferences from God to creatures that the doctrine of the univocity of the concept of being does not allow and that, coupled with inferences that are licensed by that doctrine, result in circularity. (shrink)

Work on Scotus's moral psychology and action theory has been concerned almost exclusively with questions about the relationship between will and intellect and in particular about the freedom of the will itself. In this essay I broaden the scope of inquiry. For I contend that Scotus's views in moral psychology are best understood against the background of a long tradition of metaethical reflection on the relationship between being and goodness. In the first section of this essay, therefore, I sketch the (...) main lines of that tradition in medieval thinking and examine the novel and sometimes daring ways in which Scotus appropriated them. In the sections that follow I elaborate on three areas of Scotus's action theory, very broadly conceived, in which his modifications of the medieval metaethical tradition can be seen bearing philosophical fruit. Thus, in the second section I examine his account of the goodness of moral acts, in the third his understanding of the passive dispositions of both sensitive appetite and will, and in the fourth his account of the active power of will. (shrink)

Scholars interested in Duns Scotus and in medieval metaphysics in general will rejoice at the recent critical edition of Duns Scotus’s Quaestiones super libros Metaphysicorum Aristotelis. The two volumes of the Quaestiones inaugurate a series of five that will contain the philosophical writings of Duns Scotus. All five volumes will be published by the Franciscan Institute of St. Bonaventure and will constitute a complement to the edition of Scotus’s theological writings that is being carried out by the (...) Scotistic Commission in Rome. Surely the work of the Franciscan Institute will remain the standard edition of Duns Scotus’s Questions on the Metaphysics for years to come, and will soon become an indispensable reference for any student of Scotus, replacing the old editions by Wadding and by Vivès that have been in use until now. Hopefully, this edition will also be instrumental in raising new interest in Scotus’s Aristotelian commentaries, an often neglected part of his work. In what follows, first we shall give a brief presentation of Duns Scotus’s Questions on the Metaphysics, focusing on their reception and their place in the framework of Scotus’s literary output; second, we shall describe the work of the editors of the Franciscan Institute; third, we shall make some remarks on the edition itself and on its significance for the studies on Scotus and on medieval metaphysics in general. (shrink)

The degree of realism that Duns Scotus understood his formal distinction to have implied is a matter of dispute going back to the fourteenth century. Both modern and medieval commentators alike have seen Scotus's later, Parisian treament of the formal distinction as less realist in the sense that it would deny any extra-mentally separate formalities or realities. This less realist reading depends in large part on a question known to scholars only in the highly corrupt edition of Luke Wadding, (...) where it is printed as the first of the otherwise spurious Quaestiones miscellaneae de formalitatibus. The present study examines this question in detail. Cited by Scotus's contemporaries as the Quaestio logica Scoti, we establish that it was a special disputation held by Scotus at Paris in response to criticisms of his use of the formal distinction in God, identify its known manuscripts, and provide an analysis based upon a corrected text, showing in particular the total unreliability of the Wadding edition. Our analysis shows that the Logica Scoti does not absolutely prohibit an assertion of formalities as correlates of the formal distinction, even in the divine Person, so long as their non-identity is properly qualified. That is, the positing of formalities does not of itself entail an unqualified or absolute distinction. (shrink)

In this paper, I examine Scotus’s claim that the categories are the subject of a propter quid science. In order to see the significance of this claim, I first trace the development of the idea that the categories are the subject of a science from Martin of Denmark, Peter of Auvergne, and Simon of Faversham. I then turn toDuns Scotus’s account of the categories as the subject of a propter quid science. Throughout the discussion, I concentrate on the fundamental problems (...) confronting anyone who claims that there is a science of the categories: namely, how they, being ten, can have an appropriate unity. Scotus, as we will see, will answer this problem by claiming that the intellect causes a greater unity in second intentions than the corresponding unity that exists in the world. As a consequence, Scotus contends that the categories are the subject of a propter quid science, one that is radically different from the science of metaphysics. (shrink)

Angelology gives Duns Scotus the occasion to test his action theory or to expand on it to accommodate the special case of angelic sin: freedom and determinism; synchronic continency; the will as a “comparative power” (assuming quasi-cognitive functions); the distinction between the two affections of the will (commodi and iustitiae).

R. Pasnau once commented that the present-day academic area of cognitive theory suits medieval thought better than epistemology. The comment seems to the point, and the focus of R. Cross’s book is thus appropriately placed. Scotus’s theory of cognition is worth a new treatment both because Scotus represents a new stage in medieval cognitive theory and because his positions are “sometimes rather fluid” and “not always as clear”. This lack of clarity extends to the most important subject in this book, (...) such as various aspects of the issue of intentionality, where Scotus’s discussion is... (shrink)

The conflagration of community stands as the “gravest and most painful testimony of the modern world.”1 So begins Jean-Luc Nancy’s The Inoperative Community. But as he quickly shows, it is not a return to a premodern communal intimacy that we should seek. The lost intimacy of community is a lost immanence. The question, instead, must be: Can absolute immanence be undone through community? “Community, or the being-ecstatic of Being itself? That would be the question.”2To answer this question, I turn to (...) an unlikely source: the political ontology of John Duns Scotus. Our return to the premodern political ontology of this medieval scholastic is not a return as nostalgic yearning. There is no longing for the... (shrink)

This paper presents an original interpretation of John Duns Scotus’s theory of hylomorphism. I argue that Scotus thinks, contrary to Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, that at least some of the extended parts of a substance—paradigmatically the organs of an animal—are themselves substances. Moreover, Scotus thinks that the form of corporeity is nothing more than the substantial forms of these organic parts. I offer an account of how Scotus thinks that the various extended parts of an animal are substantially unified. (...) First, a plurality of substances can become parts of a complex substance if they are essentially ordered to one another in the order of final causality. Second, a plurality of substances do become parts of a complex substance if they are together informed by a soul. The paper closes with some reflections on some of the ramifications of the substancehood of organic parts on the function of soul. (shrink)

Can the Proslogion argument for God’s existence be parodied to demonstrate the existence of the worst evil? This is what Duns Scotus contends in one of his works, where he presents such a parody as evidence for the argument’s unsoundness. Elsewhere, however, Scotus defends a “touched-up” version (coloratio) of Anselm’s argument. In my reconstruction, Scotus’s touched-up argument includes three stages: first, a demonstration that that than which a greater cannot be thought is a possible object of thought; second, a (...) demonstration that that than which a greater cannot be thought can be thought to exist and so can exist; third, a demonstration that that than which a greater cannot be thought actually exists. Contrary to what has sometimes been maintained, I argue that Scotus’s argument does not make any illegitimate shift from logical to real possibility. I also contend that one of the most characteristic aspects of Scotus’s touched-up argument is that the comparison between existing in the intellect and existing in reality (arguably the weakest point in standard reconstructions of Anselm’s argument) plays no role in it, and that accordingly Scotus’s argument is immune from his own parody of Anselm’s argument. (shrink)

This paper aims to contribute to the history of the concept of contingency as it has been developed by John Duns Scotus in his Quaestiones Super Libros Metaphysicorum in light of his reception of Avicenna’s metaphysics (al-Ila-hı-yya-t) from the Kita-b al-Šifa-’. As is known, an intermediary role was played by Henry of Ghent’s ontology. The focus is here the peculiarity of Scotus’s new way of thinking about the modalities of being in relation to metaphysics, in light of the speculations (...) of Avicenna and Henry of Ghent. Lastly, I consider the juxtaposition of Avicenna’s conception of essences and Duns Scotus’s model of potencies with Frege’s doctrine of the ‘Third Realm’ of truths. (shrink)

This chapter emphasizes Duns Scotus’s indebtedness to Henry of Ghent with respect to the major themes of his metaphysics: his univocal notion of being, his view of being qua being as the subject of metaphysics, his metaphysical proof of God's existence, and his notion of being as a quidditative rather than existential notion.

The paper presents some basic tenets of the works by the Franciscan Friar Alfonso Briceño (1587–1668), as well as of his metaphysical thought. After offering the basic structure and purpose of his monumental Controversiae, we focus on a more specific way of seeing his philosophical and theological approach, namely Controversy 5 on the infinity of God. This will allow us to see the structure of his argumentation in philosophy and theology: after putting the formulation of controversial points between the Scotist (...) and the Thomist school, he analyzes arguments against the Thomist position both in the Medieval and Baroque traditions, trying then to defend Duns Scotus’s account by a careful and articulated interpretation of his texts. (shrink)

This book offers a translation of two short commentaries by John Duns Scotus on Aristotle’s On Interpretation. It comes with an introduction, notes, and a commentary. I think that this book would be difficult for a novice; perhaps the intended audience is someone with a general familiarity with medieval philosophy, although not necessarily with medieval logic. I do not think that someone just interested in general logical issues, such as existential import or future contingents, will find much to interest (...) her here, despite some remarks in the commentary.In the introduction, Buckner and Zupko discuss these commentaries and their place in Scotus’s corpus. It seems that they were written by Scotus himself.. (shrink)

This paper studies two aspects of John Duns Scotus’s Prologue to his Questions on the Metaphysics of Aristotle. The a priori argument to prove the nobility and dignity of metaphysics and the treatment of the question about the scientific object of metaphysics and its articulation with the other realities treated in this science. The paper also shows how Scotus’s prologue follows an interpretative tradition whose principal interlocutors are Thomas Aquinas and Avicenna.

The goal of this paper is to analyze the response of John Duns Scotus to Godfrey of Fontaines’s argument against Henry of Ghent’s theory of the will’s self-motion. Godfrey’s argument is that, if the object is assumed to be causa sine qua non and the efficient causality is totally attributed to the will in the act of volition, it would also follow that not only the will’s motion but every motion in nature, such as, for example, the igniting of (...) wood, is a self-motion. In this paper, I will explain that Scotus’s refutation of this argument in Reportatio II, d. 25 is based on his reflection upon the general possibility of self-motion as well as upon the indeterminacy of the will’s act. In doing so, I will show that the development of Scotus’s theory of the will’s motion is closely related to his universalized theory of self-motion. (shrink)

I do not think scholars have thought hard enough about Scotus’s position that there are necessary moral truths over which God has no control. Just about everyone who writes on Scotus’s ethics has noted this position, but none has paid sufficient philosophical attention to it. It turns out that necessary moral truths are logically necessary (in Scotus’s sense of logical modalities), and the fact that they are logically necessary significantly alters how we should understand radical-sounding claims in Scotus to the (...) effect that God can do whatever is logically possible. Demonstrably, what Scotus means is that God can do whatever it is logically possible for God to do, and this class is rather smaller than the class of the logically possible simpliciter. (shrink)

According to Scotus, an intelligible species with universal content, inherent in the mind, is a partial cause of an occurrent cognition whose immediate object is the self-same species. I attempt to explain how Scotus defends the possibility of this causal activity. Scotus claims, generally, that forms are causes, and that inherence makes no difference to the capacity of a form to cause an effect. He illustrates this by examining a case in which an accident is an instrument of a substance (...) in the production of a certain sort of effect. All that is required is that the accident is relevantly joined to the substance, whether or not it inheres in the substance. Since intelligible species are bearers of semantic content, it follows that non-inherent objects of thought can also be the bearers of such content. Such objects are included in the mind without inherence, and the boundary between the mind and external reality is to this extent broken down. (shrink)

By all accounts one of the most influential philosophical contributions of Duns Scotus is his distinction between intuitive cognition, in which a thing is known as present and existing, and abstractive cognition, which abstracts from actual presence and existence. Recent scholarship has focused almost exclusively on the role given intuitive cognition in the justification of contingent propositions and on the debates over certitude which arose from the critiques of Scotus's distinction by Peter Aureoli and William of Ockham.

Duns Scotus's place of prominence in the intellectual history of medieval Europe rests on his work in theology and metaphysics rather than in logic and philosophy of language. This is justified; do...

The paper is devoted to the question of the sources of normativity in John Duns Scotus. Confronted with different conceptions of the sources of normativity listed by Christine M. Korsgaard, Duns Scotus’ conception turns out to be hybrid because he iterweaves realistic and voluntaristic elements. In Scotus’ ethics one can find the sources of normativity analizing: (1) subjective condition of the agent such as beeing free and rational; (2) objective foundations of moral norms such as natural law; (3) (...) external authority of the law maker (God’s will). The following questions have been raised: “Why is the will, according to Scotus, rational?”; “What are the conditions for the exeptions of the Second Tablet Commadments ?”; “Can one call Scotus’ position a type of metaethical voluntarism or Divine Command Ethics?”. The article also highlights the varius meanings of the term “voluntarism” with reference to Scotus’ ethics. (shrink)

Almost a decade ago, the Scotistic Commission under the direction of Charles Balic, O.F.M., set out to remedy the last named condition with a new critical edition of the Opera Omnia Scoti. Innumerable difficulties and obstacles, however, have delayed the work. Although the first volume is to appear shortly, it will be many years before the complete edition will be available. Fortunately historical research is at such a stage that we are in a position to determine in main outline what (...) works are authentic, dubious or spurious. From present indications, at least, the critical edition is not expected to introduce any radical changes of doctrine, although it will make for a better and clearer reading. Consequently, a translation of some of the more important sections of the works of Scotus based upon the present editions is not without value, and will fill a very definite need until the critical editions and official versions appear. The translation which follows is intended as a step in that direction. (shrink)

This paper discusses Scotus’s view of how God knows sins by analyzing texts from his discussions of God’s permission of sin and predestination. I show that Scotus departed from his standard theory of how God knows contingents when explaining how God knows sins. God cannot know sins by knowing a first-order act of his will, as he knows other contingents according to Scotus, since God does not directly will sins. I suggest that Scotus’s recognition that his standard theory of God’s (...) knowledge of contingents could not account for how God knows sins may have contributed to his ultimate rejection of this theory. (shrink)