Name der Zeitschrift: Das Mittelalter Jahrgang: 20 Heft: 2 Seiten: 266-278.

Echoing much of the neo-Thomistic revival of the twentieth century, Fides et Ratio §76 sketches the two main characteristics of a Christian philosophy: it is a type of thinking which simultaneously employs yet always seeks to purify reason and, secondly, it does not close itself off to the concerns and content of revelation. In this way, Pope John Paul II calls for a contemporary understanding of faith which is seen as a virtue freeing human reason from presumption, "the typical temptation (...) of the philosopher." In his latest, Bruno Niederbacher likewise calls for such learned docility in both the human soul as well as in the modern Academy. Divided into six main sections, this work concentrates on two main arguments. First, he shows why Thomas held that faith enables assent to what is and thus proves to be a necessary virtue for correct thinking and action and, secondly, what significance such a claim has for us today. (shrink)

Charles S. Peirce has a great deal to contribute both to understanding and to solving many of the philosophical problems which puzzle contemporary thinkers. In fact it is probably true that in some ways philosophers of our time are in a better position to understand Peirce's thought than those of his own day. In this paper I would like to consider two puzzling notions: 1) the substantiality of things, and 2) the foundations of human knowledge.

Este artículo presenta la cuestión de si las creencias religiosas son o no razonables, es decir, si tienen o no una evidencia razonable que las sustente. El interés no es comprobar la existencia de Dios, sino simplemente saber si el lenguaje religioso como tal tiene o no sentido. Para esto, primero veremos la concepción de la creencia en general. A continuación, trataremos las creencias religiosas bajo dos puntos de vistas totalmente opuestos: por un lado, se expondrá la posición de autores (...) que dicen que las creencias religiosas sí tienen una evidencia razonable que las sustenta y, por otro, nos encontraremos con autores que afirman que dichas creencias no pueden ser justificadas racionalmente porque lo espiritual refiere el ámbito de lo indecible, en el cual no es factible afirmar que los enunciados religiosos son apropiados a ser verdaderos o falsos. (shrink)

Crowe presents the evolution of Lonergan's thinking on Christology in the context of the radical developments contained within his other theological writings.

In the academic year 1920-1921 at the University of Freiburg, Martin Heidegger gave a series of extraordinary lectures on the phenomenological significance of the religious thought of St. Paul and St. Augustine. The publication of these lectures in 1995 settled a long disputed question, the decisive role played by Christian theology in the development of Heidegger’s philosophy. The lectures present a special challenge to readers of Heidegger and theology alike. Experimenting with language and drawing upon a wide range of now (...) obscure authors, Heidegger is finding his way to Being and Time through the labyrinth of his Catholic past and his increasing fascination with Protestant theology. A Companion to Heidegger's Phenomenology of Religious Life is written by an international team of Heidegger specialists. (shrink)

There is, in the Ramsey Archive at the Hillman Library of the University of Pittsburgh, a note, written in 1929, in Ramsey's hand and mostly in German, consisting of twenty paragraphs the contents...

Introduction -- Tending the dark fire: the Boehmian notion of drive -- The night-side of nature: the early Schellingian unconscious -- The speculative psychology of dissociation: the later Schellingian unconscious -- Schellingian libido theory.

Cora Diamond has recently criticised as mere legend the interpretation of a quip of Ramsey's, contained in the epigraph below, which takes him to be objecting to or rejecting Wittgenstein's Tractarian distinction between saying and showing. Whilst I agree with Diamond's discussion of the legend, I argue that her interpretation of the quip has little evidential support, and runs foul of a criticism sometimes made against intuitionism. Rather than seeing Ramsey as making a claim about the nature of propositions, as (...) Diamond does, we should understand him as making a claim about the grammar of the logical connectives. Such a view coheres with the extant evidence of the nature of Wittgenstein's and Ramsey's 1929 philosophical encounters. It is also compatible with attributing to Ramsey a recognition of Wittgenstein's distinction and with denying that criticising it is the lesson of the quip. (shrink)