WHAT HAVE MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHERS CONTRIBUTED TO THE

UNDERSTANDING OF PHILOSOPHY?

Philosophy Division
School of Arts and Sciences

In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirement for the Course
Medieval Philosophy (Philo 506)

Presented by:
Samson A. Bernales, Jr.

Presented to:
Prof. Rex T. Rola

October 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover Page

Table of Contents

Introduction

Part I:
A.

The Origins of Medieval Philosophy

St. Augustine of Hippo .

Fides quaerens Intelectum

10

Illumination

11

13

14

The Emergence of the Problem of Universals

Porphyrys Problem of Universals .
.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

15
16

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

18
.

19

20

25

27

30

32

34

City of God

Ex nihilo nihil fit

B.

Boethius

.
.
.
.
.
.
Consolation of Philosophy

.
.

Boethius Response/ Solution

C.

Peter Abelard .

Abelards Response/ Solution

D.

St. Anselm of Canterbury

Faith Seeking Understanding

Monologion (The Rational Basis of Truth)

Argument from Goodness

34

Argument from Being

35

Argument from Perfection

36

Proslogion (Address)
Part II: The Maturity of Medieval Philosophy

37

39

E.

Saint Bonaventure

39

40

41

43

Deepening of Aristotelian Philosophy .

44

Summa Theologica .

46

Hierarchy of Law .

49

Part III: Critical Reflection and Reconstruction .

51

Faith and Reason

Accounts on Creation

F.

G.

Thomas Aquinas

John Duns Scotus

Individuation

51

53

The Argument for Gods Existence

51

Argument I

54

Argument II

54

Argument III

55

H.

William of Ockham

56

Definitions (Real definitions and Nominal definitions) .

57

Mental Language

Ockham's Razor

56

58

Conclusion .

60

References

61

Introduction

Philosophy as coined by Philosopher Pythagoras is derived from the Greek

words Philos which means Love and Sophia which means Wisdom. Therefore,
Philosophy is defined as the Love for Wisdom. This is basic in Philosophy lessons
however as the lesson goes deeper, one learns that the greatest Love is God and the
greatest Wisdom is also is God. In contemporary era, Philosophy is the ultimate search
for truth and the telos is the Truth with the big T who is no other but God. This
conquest for knowing God maybe started by the Greeks namely, Socrates, Plato and
Aristotle but its golden age shines forth in the dark ages called the Medieval Era. Various
Philosophers such as St. Augustine of Hippo who were regarded as the greatest
Churchman Fathers, Boethius who translated the works of Plato into Latin, Peter Abelard,
John Scotus Erigena, St. Anselm of Catenbury, Bonaventure, The Price of Scholastics
Thomas Aquinas, John Duns Scotus and William of Ockham marked their name in
history of the Middle Ages in discovering the truth about God.
Is there really God? Is it possible to know God? How can one be certain of the
will of God? Can reason and faith reconcile? These are just some of the vast queries
people can bump into in studying and more importantly learning how the Philosophers in
the Middle Ages struggle with their own sets of questions concerning God.
To deepen ones understanding with regards to the notion of God, one has to
ground himself in reflection of how the medieval thinkers contribute to the understanding
of philosophy. Medieval philosophy is one of the most important historical divisions of
philosophy. It refers to the philosophy of Western Europe during the Middle Ages, that
is between the fourth and the fourteenth century. This period was characterized by the

decline of the classical pagan culture and the revival of Christian civilization and a high
period for scholasticism.
Understanding how medieval philosophers contributed to the understanding
philosophy will help one to appreciate the beauty of knowing ones faith, ones
relationship to God and ultimately the attempt of knowing God. The collapse of the
Roman Empire makes Western Europe lapsed into its Dark Ages. The monasteries
remained to be the focal points of formal academic learning. The Catholic Church served
as an avenue for philosophical activity until the twelfth century, in the renaissance and in
the period of enlightenment. Therefore, much of the philosophical writings in that period
are closely related to religion, faith and the relationship of man to God. The rise of
Christianity was conversely threatened by pagan attacks. In order to defend the Christian
faith from criticisms, theologians found it necessary to turn to philosophy. To justify
divine revelation, these theologians sought to rationalize. Reason became an essential
faculty to support faith. Philosophers who defended the Church in this period are called
apologetics. Philosophy was then purported to be the handmaid of theology in explaining,
defending and complementing its dogma.

Part I: The Origins of Medieval Philosophy

A. St. Augustine of Hippo
St. Augustine of Hippo also known as Aurelius Augustinus, a Christian
Neoplatonist and a defender of the Roman Catholic Church, was a towering figure in
medieval philosophy. He was regarded as the greatest of the churchman Fathers. He is
also regarded as the greatest thinker of all times. His influence extended up to the modern
period until the present. Augustines work was a combination of the Greek philosophical
tradition and the Judeo-Christian religious and scriptural traditions.
During the cultural crisis of the Roman Empire, Augustine encountered two
major problems. That which concerns metaphysics is the question on the relation between
faith and reason (Epistemology). Is faith sufficient enough to pursue wisdom or does it
need the help of reason? The epistemological problem, on the other hand, addresses the
question pertaining to the one and the many (Metaphysics). What accounts for the
existence of the one and the many? Fides querens Intelectum or Faith follows
understanding is the stand point of Augustine in the Dark Ages. In his time, Augustine
encountered the dilemma whether he would pursue with the knowledge about God or just

be contented with the wisdoms offered by philosophy. In his quest for more wisdom,
Augustine realized that the greatest wisdom can only be God. By that point, he becomes
an apologetic, the defender of the Church. Then, Augustine becomes the Bishop of
Hippo. He was regarded as the greatest Christian thinkers before St. Thomas Aquinas.
The epistemological problem encountered by Augustine is the dilemma between faith and
reason. The questions are, is reason sufficient enough? Is faith can stand alone? And even
more crucial, how can finite mind attain certainty? For Augustine, he must believe what
he understands and understand what he believes. In his time, Truth is only attainable true
faith which is the belief in Jesus Christ as God and the human reason. Augustine realized
that reason alone in insufficient because it must be supported with belief or a strong sense
of faith. The same true with faith which cannot stand alone without reason. Augustine
came up with the notion of Illumination in which he view God to be the ultimate source
of all knowledge enlightening us and what we know is just a facet from the wisdom of
God. What we know is just a drop of water from the vast ocean of wisdom of God.
Illumination put beings into degrees in its theory of participation. The topmost Being is
God who is the intelligible light beyond all light and then followed by creations namely,
Angels, Humans, Animals and Plants. Our mind needs the light of God to know the
world. Truths and ideas are coming from the same divine illumination who is God. In the
problem of the one and the many which poses question on how can the One who is
God, created the many which are the creatures or also properly termed as Ex Ni
Hilo Nihil Fit or Out of nothing, nothing comes. Augustine answered that creation is
the free act of God.

Fides quaerens Intelectum (Faith follows understanding)

Augustines Philosophy is defined as love of wisdom but that love of
wisdom is for the attainment of happiness. His philosophy was centered on human
existence concerning God and the soul. He asserted that the souls search for knowledge
and love is directed towards God. He was disposed by his notion of philosophy in which
the goal is in lined with Happiness. Man being limited, has doubts and fears came up with
the idea of knowing oneself and that to achieve happiness is to have the truth. However,
how can a finite mind can attain certainty? With regards to this pursuit, Augustine
examined whether it is possible to attain certitude. In so doing, he studied all the truths
man needs to pursue to wisdom. He was so disposed that he has an unbounded desire to
apprehend the truth not only in believing but also understanding .St. Augustine of Hippo
uses two guides to apprehend the truth. These are firstly by the authority of Christ and
secondly by human reason. St. Augustine of Hippo is aware that human reason alone is
insufficient. Fides querens Intelectum or known as Faith follows understanding. For St.
Augustine of Hippo, faith in Jesus Christ must come first as preparation to understanding.
Once one has accepted the truths of faith, reason intervenes to help one to help him
understand better what he believes. According to St. Augustine of Hippo, reason let man
knows where to go. Reason serves as a direction of man but it is faith which teaches man
how to get there. By that, St. Augustine constructed the theory of Illumination.

Illumination

St. Augustine of Hippo addresses the mystery of God and his relation to the
world. He made an effort to look into the nature, origin and destiny of the soul. However,
in his process of his investigation, he was further puzzled by the idea of the relation
between the contingent beings and the necessary being. How can these creatures be
related to God? Augustine addressed this question and finally came up with that notion.
Since no creature, however rational and intellectual, is lighted of itself, but is lighted by
participation of eternal Truth, the soul finds itself illumined by God in its quest for truths.
Following Plotinus, Augustine formulated his own version of the theory of
illumination. The human mind does not have the capability to comprehend immutable
Truth. There must therefore be a universal source of light which illumines all beings,
allowing them to see the Light God. The human reason has limitations. Reason
must therefore cooperate with faith as the soul embarks its journey to God. In line with
this claim, Augustine argued that in order to understand Gods word, one has to believe it.
Thus, reason needs the companionship of faith to pursue wisdom. The theory of
Illumination of St. Augustine of Hippo consists of different degrees of reality of being.
St. Augustine of Hippo views the world as being hierarchically arranged. He maintained
that nothing is completely real except God. God Himself is the intelligible light and the
source of all light. He Himself is the primitive ultimate source of brightness that extends
to all intelligence. As our eyes have the need of the light of the sun in order to see
sensible objects, our minds then need the light of God to know the world and everything
in it. Man ideas, notions, laws, principles and truth are all imparted to our mind by His
Divine Illumination. St. Augustine of Hippo conclusively stated that man cannot know
things with being enlightened by Gods Divine Illumination.

City of God
One of the greatest contributions of St. Augustine of Hippo is his writings about
City of God which tackles about the God of the Neoplatonist. St. Augustine of Hippo
pointed out that the God of the Neoplatonist is similar to the God of the Christians. Both
Christians and Neoplatonist viewed God as incorporeal, immutable, infinite, and source
of all things. St. Augustine of Hippo further explained that Plato could have had some
knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures. However, since Platonists relied on the power of
reason, they were not able to reach God.

For Augustine, history is a dialectical

struggle between two loves with consequences reaching into eternity. He presented
history as a story of two cities. The City of God is constituted by the Love of the
Uncreated Good. On the other hand the City of Creatures is established by the Love of
Created Goods. The city of God is characterized by liberty and holiness whereas the city
of creatures is ruled by Slavery and Sin. These two cities do exist not only in the created
world but they also subsist beyond this world. The City of God or the Heavenly City is
headed by Christ whose followers include those Angels and People who chose to be
recipients of Gods grace. On contrary, the city of creatures or the Earthly City is ruled
by Satan whose worshippers consist of souls who have chosen to be away of Gods grace.

10

These two cities can be seen as Light and Darkness. In the absence of light, there is
darkness. Like these two phenomena, the cities are opposed to each other.

Ex nihilo nihil fit

St. Augustine of Hippo came up with the doctrine Ex nihilo nihil fit also
known as Out of nothing, nothing comes. With this work St. Augustine rejected the
doctrine of emanation of Plotinus which explains that everything is created out of
necessary and eternal emanation from God. In contrast, St. Augustine of Hippo explains
that God created everything out of free act. Since God is independent of any force, He
therefore willingly created the universe from nothing. God chooses to create the world.
God is the ultimate source of everything for out of nothing, He created everything.
According to St. Augustine of Hippo, the world was created with time for time began
only on the outset of creation. Creation, however, is not eternal since eternity refers to the
duration of immutable being. God created time and that man have no notion of before
creation. This concurrently implies that creatures, except those which are spiritual, are
subject to temporality. God ordered all things according to measure, number, and weight.
St. Augustine emphasized that God, as naturally good, created only what is good. How
then can we explain the existence of evil? When a creature lacks measure, form, and
order, its nature is vitiated such that the natural limitation of creatures results to physical
evil and the privation of right order in a created will produce moral evil. The created will
is deprived of the right order when it voluntarily deviates from goodness. Man can

11

therefore choose to be good or do evil because of the endowed freedom as bestowed by

God Himself.

The Emergence of the Problem of Universals

Universals are a class of mind-independent entities, usually contrasted with
individuals, postulated to ground and explain relations of qualitative identity and
resemblance among individuals. They can be Individuals or Particulars. On the other
hand, they are identified to be similar in virtue of sharing universals. Universals play an
important role in philosophy. Many philosophers believe that unobservable entities do
exist and that they function as keys to explain observable things. The problem of
universals originated from the ancient thinkers and was later passed on to the medieval
philosophers. The problem was first responded by Plato. Plato believed that there exists a
universal which accounts for the resemblance among individuals. Plato termed it as
Form. This form is immaterial and abstract. Individuals, for him, are mere participants
in the universals. However, Platos claim was later on criticized by his student Aristotle.
Unlike Plato, Aristotle contended that universals are not Forms but are Substantial Forms.
Universals exist not outside things but are inherent in them. Universals are immanent in
the concrete beings themselves.
There are three aspects of Philosophy that attempted to solve the problem
namely Realism, Nominalism, and Conceptualism. Realism has also its own division
namely Extreme Realism which was founded by Plato and Strong Realism whose

12

proponent was Aristotle. Realists acknowledge the existence of universals. In objection to

the position of the Realists, Conceptualists and Nominalists deny that universals exist and
that they are needed. With all of these positions, it is very evident that the problem called
for rigorous philosophical speculations.

Porphyrys Problem of Universals

Porphyry is responsible for posting the medieval problem of universals. In
his Isagoge, Porphyry expressed his questions concerning his problem of universals.
Firstly, do genera and species subsist or are they simply something in the mind? That is,
do genera and species extra mental realities which are ontological realities (real existence
apart from the mind) or are they purely mental constructs (product of the mind).
Secondly, if subsisting, are they corporeal of incorporeal? Given that genera and species
are found in reality and not just in the mind, one can still ask whether they are corporeal
or not. Lastly, are they separated from or located in sensible things? If they are corporeal,
then they do subsist in sensible things apart from them? Philosophers of the middle age
came up with their own solutions regarding this problem of Universals but only two
Philosophers left a mark. They are Boethius and Peter Abelard.

13

B. Boethius
Boethius also known as Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius was a student
of Greek Philosophy and a master of the Greek language. Boethius is a prolific
literary writer whose work entitled Consolation of Philosophy which became widely
spread throughout the Western Europe during the Middle Ages. He was known to be
one of the most important mediator by which Greek philosophical ideas were
continued in the Medieval Era. He was also a remarkable figure in the field of
mathematics. He translated the Logic of Aristotle into Latin, added comments on
them and brought it in into the heart of education in Europe. Boethius did not see
contradictions between the practice of Christianity and the pursuit of philosophy. In
fact, his philosophical works have long been recognized as an important medium
through which ancient philosophy found its way to the Middle Ages. Boethius put
his concern on the matters pertaining to Soul and Knowledge. As a student of Greek
philosophy, he mastered the Greek language and was known to pass the Greek
philosophical ideas unto the middle ages. Boethius was imprisoned for treason and
was executed. However, before his execution and in prison, the prison cell gave him

14

the opportunity produce the Consolation in which he put his thoughts of happiness,
chance, freedom and Gods knowledge on our free acts, fortune and death.

Consolation of Philosophy
Boethius wrote his Consolation of Philosophy as a philosophical
framework and a treatise on fortune and death. The Consolation become the most
popular and influential book of the Middle Ages. Boethius was also confronted with
the problem of Universals as presented by Porphyry about the relation between
genera or species and specific objects. Porphyry raised the three questions. Firstly,
do genera and species subsist or are they purely in the mind? Secondly, if they
subsist, are they corporeal or incorporeal? Lastly, if they are incorporeal, then do
they subsist in sensible things apart from them? Boethius points out that there are
two types of incorporeal. Firstly, which do or can exist in reality apart from bodies
like God and the intellectual soul? Secondly, those which cannot exist in reality but
exist separated from bodies like mathematical entities such as line and numbers. In
Greek, only universal and unchanging is intelligible. Boethius translations of Greeks
were significant for the thoughts of the middle ages especially the fundamentals of
Aristotelian logic.

Boethius Response/ Solution

15

Boethius explains that there are two kinds of incorporeals. Firstly, those which
do or can exist in reality apart from bodies like God and the intellectual soul. Secondly,
those which cannot in reality exist separated from the bodies like mathematical entities
such as line and numbers. The Greek tradition as reechoed by Boethius had recognized
that only what is Universal and unchanging is truly intelligible. The real world as
immediately given to the senses is made up of individuals that constantly change.
Boethius made two commentaries on Porphyrys Isagoge. He answered Porphyrys
questions by using the perspectives of Plato and Aristotle. Boethius attempt to figure out
whether universals are just meaningful concepts or existing entities did not succeed. That
is the reason he turned to Plato and Aristotle to come up with an understanding of the
universals and using their lenses to address the problem.
As Boethius uses the lens of Plato, Boethius came up with the solution that to
account for the many given the one is through theory of Participation. Plato denied the
full reality of the sensible world. Plato posited that the ideas or forms are completely
separate from the world of individual sensible things. The realm of separately existing
Universal form was the real world and sensible things were only partially real in the
sense that they were only images of the ideal and separated forms. For Plato, Universals
exist as fully real outside the mind. According to Plato as quoted by Boethius, Universals
have extra mental realities, incorporeal and separated from things.
Boethius uses logic to investigate the universal. He formulated a
solution chiefly in terms of Aristotles approach to the problem

16

because he is commenting on an introduction to Aristotles Categories.

(Aspell, 1999)
As Boethius uses the lens of Aristotle, Boethius came up with the solution that
to account the one given the many is through theory of Abstraction. Aristotle rejected
Platos separation of Universal forms from individual sensible things. Aristotle located
forms in sensible things because forms are found in reality outside the mind only as
individuals and not as universals. Aristotle guaranteed the full reality of sensible
individuals and avoided the difficulty encountered by Plato in trying to relate the dualistic
world of forms and sensible things. In the abstraction of Aristotle as Boethius used it is an
activity of the intellect that renders the form found as individual outside the mind that is
universal and intelligible mind. The process in the abstraction is knowing not a simple
case perception that is sensory faculties but by intellection. For Aristotle, universals have
extramental realities that I corporeal in the sense that reality of forms does not exist in an
incorporeal way but is immanent in concrete beings in themselves in immanent forms.
Beings are real only in the level of the senses but not really real because only the
substantial form is what we can know as in the level of intellect.
The Aristotelian solution is that Universals subsist in one manner and are
understood in another. They subsist as individual in sensible things but
are understood as universals and having being in themselves apart from
sensible things . . . Boethius unties the knot of this dilemma by
recognizing that falsity arises in the intellect only as a result of its
conjoining things and never as a result of separation. (Spade, 1994)

17

We can separate the universal from the bodily conditions which render it
individuality in reality without error. By means of this, the intellect can know the
universal in its purity as separate from the sensible things even though it is never found in
such a condition in reality without falsity. Boethius states that Universal occurs as the
result of collecting similarities among individuals of the same species or of the same
genus. For Boethius, genera and species do exist both in things and in the mind. He
further goes that they exist concretely in things and abstractly or immaterially in the
mind. Moreover, he explains that they exist both in things and apart from them in the
mind.

First Commentary
Boethius regarded the understanding of universals as a process which directs
the mind towards a higher understanding. That is taken from the Aristotelian perspective
but unlike Plato, the Universals for Boethius is understood as not apart from sensible
things but is attached to them. As Boethius explained this, he claimed that the genus of
something corporeal, although itself incorporeal, could never be separated from a body.
However, there are two types of incorporeality according to Boethius. The first one
includes those which exist apart from bodies such as God and the intellectual soul. The
other one comprises those which cannot exist separate from bodies like mathematics.
Second Commentary

18

Boethius this time took into account Aristotles theories in solving the problem
of Universals. Universal is defined as common to all members of a given class. However,
Boethius assumed that while universal is common to many things, it still remained its
singularity that is it is not shared in parts amongst its individual members. The universal
must therefore be whole in each member. However, it is impossible for a universal to be
at the same time to be one and many. Universals therefore cannot exist as substances. In
result, Boethius concluded that universals must be mere thoughts. These thoughts,
however, must be based on objects which exist in reality, or else, they would be empty.
Boethius responses to the questions of Porphyry regarding the problem of
Universals are summed up in the following. According to Boethius, Universals are
thoughts subsisting in sensible objects. Since universals are thoughts, it follows that they
are incorporeal. Given that they subsist in things, Universals therefore do not subsist
outside things except as ideas in human and Divine minds.

C. Peter Abelard
Peter Abelard has a reputation in the history of Medieval Philosophy. Peter
Abelard immersed himself not only in the fields of philosophy and theology but also in
music and poetry. Furthermore, his works in Philosophy made him known throughout
entire Europe. Peter Abelards philosophical writings are all concerned in logic.
Consequently, he was the first great Nominalist and the greatest logician of the Middle

19

Ages. Peter Abelard continued the speculation of Aristotle and Boethius. Peter Abelard
deepened and extended the ideas handed down in Meddle ages from the early Greeks.
Peter Abelards charisma on Philosophy is thanks to his approach to logic which is
conceptualism. His systematic treatment of religious doctrines became a viable avenue
for philosophic dialogue. The method of Abelard is Dialectic. He relates philosophy and
theology in his Credo ut Intellegiam and Intelligo ut Credum. Abelard has ways of
formulating the problem brought by Universals such as; what is anything is extra mental
reality corresponds to the universals concepts in the mind? How our universal concepts
are formed? And how is scientific knowledge which for all practical purpose is possible?
Abelards philosophical writings are concerned with logic. In his works, he did not just
continue the speculation started by Aristotle, Porphyry and Boethius but he also deepened
and sharpened their ideas. Conceptualism is the approach of Abelard to Logic. Abelard is
also confronted with the problem of Universals as presented by Porphyry as the same as
confronted by Boethius. It is because it porphyrys questions did not end up with
Boethius. Since, this problem of Universals has become the subjects of debates for
several years, Abelard developed three major approaches namely, exaggerated realism,
conceptualism or moderate realism and Nominalism. Exaggerated realism and moderate
realism pointed out universals as real things. Genera or species exist in reality and that
individual things share in these universals. Universals are not mental constructs and that
they are corporeal present in individual things. Nominalism points out that individual
exist in nature. According to this approach, genera and species are mental constructs and
not real things. They are only terms that have no meaning. Universal are just words and
are not real. As to answer the question posted by Porphyry, Abelard replies with the

20

following. The question, do genera and species subsist or are they purely in the mind?
The answer of Abelard, they exist only in the intellect but they signify real things. They
signify the same individuals represented by particular concepts although they signify
them confusedly and indistinctly. The question, are they corporeal or incorporeal? The
answer of Abelard is that as long as they are words, they are corporeal and sensible but
the universals capacity to signify many similar individuals is incorporeal. The question,
do universals subsist in sensible things apart from them? Abelard answered, as long as
universals signify the forms of sensible things they exist in them, but in as much as they
signify abstract concepts like those of the divine, they are transcendent or beyond
sensible world. Solution of the problem is not found in the nature but in God.

Abelards Response/ Solution

The answers to the problems of Universals did not end up with Boethius.
Boethius just started the curiosity of the Medievals and the Problem of the Universals
became the debate of its age. There are three major approaches to answer the problems of
Universals as noted by Peter Abelard and these are exaggerated Realism, Nominalism
and Conceptualism also known as moderate realism. Peter Abelard opposed the claims of
Realism and Conceptualism. Exaggerated Realists speak of universals as real things. The
genera and species exist in reality and that individual things share in these Universals.
According to Peter Abelard, Universals are not mental constructs and that they are
corporeal present in individual beings. Peter Abelard argued that ontology of universals
grounded upon realism is incoherent. He as well contested Boethius criteria of universals

21

by arguing that universals cannot be present as a whole in many. According to peter

Abelard, Universals cannot be real objects in the world. Peter Abelard then suggested that
Universality is not an ontological feature of the world but it is a semantic feature of
language.
Nominalist claims that only individuals exist in nature. The position of the
Nominalists is that genera and species are just mental constructs and they are not real
things. General term does not refer to anything. Term is just a word that is voices
expressed as a vocal emission. Therefore, Nominalist concluded it to be meaningless.
Peter Abelard used his traditional knowledge on the meaning of statement as basis for
grounding his theory of universals. In contrast to Boethius, Abelard claimed that
Universals are not thoughts but are words. These words do not refer to sensible things but
to their condition of being. The general characteristic of a certain genus or species our
minds conceive is simply a sign posting to the condition of their being which is,
accordingly, the real reference of the universal-words. Thus, universals do not point to
things but to the way things are.
Moreover, universals for Abelard are not just vocal utterances as his teacher
Roscelin pointed out. Universals, in his view, are words with meaning. Universals, he
said, are not simply words (voces) in the sense of a physical entity which cannot be
predicated of another thing, but are words (sermones) which function as signs with a
logical content which is predicable of another. The meaning of these words is founded
upon a commonality between individuals. These words are called common names.
Common names are in turn identified as universal concepts because they are formed by

22

abstraction; universal concepts direct our attention to the similarities in objects which
makes us ignore other features in the same objects.
Abelard took into account such analysis in answering the question of universals
raised by Porphyry. Universals, he replied, are words conceived by the intellect for the
purpose of signification. But because they signify real things, they cannot be held as
subjects of purely empty thoughts. He further described universals as both corporeal and
incorporeal corporeal because of the nature of things they signify and incorporeal
because of the way these things are signified. Finally, he maintained that inasmuch as
universals point to the conditions of sensible things, they subsist in them but inasmuch as
they denote abstract concepts in the minds of human and of God, they exist beyond the
sensible world.

D. St. Anselm of Canterbury

St. Anselm of Canterbury was one of the most important and celebrated
thinkers in the eleventh century. St. Anselm of Catenbury is famous for his original work
with no predecessor that is known as Ontological Argument that is used not only in
philosophy but more importantly to Theology. In History, his so-called ontological
argument for Gods existence was his most important legacy. However, aside from his
theistic proofs, his conception of the divine nature as well as his assertion on the relation
between philosophy and religion also left a heavy mark in the history of philosophy and

23

theology. Ontological argument extends to many other important philosophical and

theological matters that includes understanding the aspects and the unity of the divine
nature. It addresses the questions such as what differentiates God from his creatures. If he
encompasses everything, how can the human mind know him? Can God really be
known? To compete with these questions, St. Anselm of Catenbury was guided by the
dogmas of Christianity supported by the insights of Neo-Platonism. Christian beliefs are
grounded by faith. Neoplatonist doctrines are based on reason. The two are naturally
opposed to each other. Thus, the relation between faith and reason needs to be reconciled.
St. Anselm is one of the greatest thinkers of the Christianity in the eleventh century. He is
known for his writings of Monologion in 1076 or the Model meditation on God and
Proslogion or Address in 1078 or Fides Quarens Intellectum (Faith seeking
understanding). These are both concerned to provide rational arguments for the existence
and attributes of God. The Monologion has three fold structures. Firstly, the empirical
observation of variation in degrees by which leads to the presupposition of standard.
Secondly, a judgment that refers to a standard. And lastly, the reality of the standard. The
three basis of argumentation were tied up to the characteristics of substance namely, the
Good on Chapter I, the Being of Chapter III and the perfection on Chapter IV. The
beginning of the first proof is the presuppose acceptance that there is goodness in things.
There is an empirical observation of variation in degrees as to the goodness in things such
as the good, better and best. These mentioned goods must have a cause and since all
particular goods are equally good, they can only be good by their participation in a single
and same good and that supremely good is God. The Proslogion is a sermon consists of
26 chapters which then also called the Address. It is considered as the ontological

24

argument for the existence of God. The id quo maius argument has many versions that
lead to confusions and misinterpretations like aliquid quo maius nihil cogitari potest or
something than which nothing greater can be thought. The id quo maius cogitari newit
or than that which nothing greater can be conceived tells us that whatever exist in
reality is greater than what exist in the mind. Therefore, God exist in the mind and in
reality. The aliquid quomaius cogitari non valet or something than which a greater
cannot be thought tells us that god exist not only in idea that is mentally but also
extramentally. This is the greatest notion among the others because it is in the level of
intellection rather than comprehension therefore God should not be reduced into mere
concept as seen by Chapter XV of Proslogion that tells us quid am maius quam cogitari
posit or God is something greater than can be thought.

Faith Seeking Understanding

This is also known as Fides quaerens Intellectum. Saying that faith should
seek understanding does not actually mean that faith should be replaced with
understanding. As a deeply devoted Christian who began his thinking with the
assumption that the doctrines of Christianity are true, St. Anselm of Catenbury was
driven by faith in seeking understanding to find rational explanations to the Christian
teachings he already believed. Faith must not be taken as belief on the basis of testimony
and understanding as belief on the basis of philosophical insight. Anselms theistic proofs
are not means to have a philosophical insight on the existence of God as we come to
believe his existence on the basis of testimony. There is more to them that we need to

25

know. These proofs do not serve an epistemic function. Their purpose, rather, is
volitional. They are intended not only to believers but to unbelievers as well.
Faith, for Anselm, is love for God and a drive to act as God wills. Hence,
faith seeking understanding can closely be associated as an active love of God seeking
a deeper knowledge of God. Anselm acknowledged both faith and reason as sources
of knowledge. But he was not in favor of the position held by extreme dialecticians as to
the primacy of reason over faith. According to him, reason finds itself united with faith.
So, understanding proceeds from faith. St. Anselm of Catenbury made it clear that his
enterprise of proving Gods existence could not even begin unless he had already
believed in His existence. This is what Anselm implied when he said,
. . . I do not endeavor, O Lord, to penetrate thy sublimity, for in no wise do I
compare my understanding with that; but I long understand in some degree thy
truth, which my heart believes and loves. For I do not seek in order that I may
believe, but I believe in order that I may understand. For I also believe this, that
unless I believe, I shall not understand. (Proslogion, Chapter 1)

Monologion (The Rational Basis of Truth)

Anselm wrote Monologion for those who would want to meditate on God
solely on the basis of reason. The Monologion was written at the request of the monk of
Bec where St. Anselm of Catenbury then is the prior. St. Anselm of Catenbury was asked
to write a model meditation on God, in which everything would be proved by reason

26

alone, not even depending on the scripture. To prove Gods existence, he provided the
arguments namely Argument from Goodness, Argument from Being and Argument from
Perfection which were all tied up to the Neo-platonic characteristics of substance.

Argument from Goodness

This is the Chapter 1 of the Monologion which argues that our senses
reveal a great number of good things. However, good things vary in degrees.
Anselm argued that their goodness must be through some one thing. Being the
source of the goodness of all other things, this one thing must be a great good
in itself. In as much as all good things are good through that one thing, that
thing must be good through itself. The good things that are good through
another cannot be greater than that thing which is good through itself. There
must therefore be a source of goodness which is supremely good among all
existing things.

Argument from Being

This is the contention of the Chapter 2 of the Monologion which argues the
existence of things. Anselm argued that since nothing exists through nothing, every
existing thing must be caused by something. We can doubt whether there is one or more
than one thing through which all things exist. Granting for instance that there is more

27

than one thing that caused the existence of all other beings, it would make no sense for
we still have to figure out the cause of their existence. A thing cannot exist either through
itself or through each other. There is therefore some one thing through which all things
exist. Being the cause of all existence, that one thing must be self-existing. Because that
thing is self-caused, it is therefore greater than all other beings.

Argument from Perfection

This content is in the Chapter 4 of the Monologion which argues that there a
hierarchy of beings. We say, for example, a mouse is worse than a cat, and a dog is better
than a cat. Human beings are best among all the animals, so on and so forth. Our
empirical observation tells us that things are of unequal levels. What then occupies the
highest level? Is it only one or are they more? Anselm argued that if there is more than
one, then they must all be equal. But they must be equal through the same thing. That
thing could not be distinct from them because if it is, then they do not occupy the same
level. That thing must be identical to them since they both reside in the highest level.
Since they are identical, they are therefore not many but one.
St. Anselm of Catenbury concluded that there exists a Supreme Being who is
the source of goodness and perfection. Through him, all things exist. Thus, he is the
greatest among all beings.

28

Proslogion (Address)
Anselm found his arguments in Monologion complex and extended. Wanting
to make them simpler, he developed the Proslogion. This address for believers which is
also a rational basis of faith in which it articulates what we believe by way of rational
argumentation but not opposing to tradition, authority and revelation. The Address on
known as Proslogion is a sermon consisting of 26 chapters that is considered to be and
ontological argument for the existence of God. Anselm derived a single argument to
prove that God really exists. This single argument, presented in the contention of the
Proslogion, is what is referred to as the ontological argument. The ontological argument
is the title given by Immanuel Kant to describe this work of St, Anselm of Catenbury. St.
Anselm of Catenbury presented his argument by stating that God is that than which no
greater can be thought. But that than which no greater can be thought must exist not only
in the mind but in reality. Therefore God actually exists. Philosophers expressed the
Proslogion in different versions. Firstly, the Id quo maius cogitari nequit or known as
God is than than which nothing greater can be conceived which is present in the
Chapter 2 of the Proslogion leads to confusion, misinterpretation and most commonly
misrepresentations. Secondly, the Aliquid maius nihil cogitari potest that is found in
Chapter 15 of the Proslogion known as God is something than which nothing greater can
be thought and lastly the Aliquid quo maius cogitari nonvalet known as God is
something than which a greater cannot be thought. These three versions all point to

29

the one and only one thing the Proslogion. However, to be precise, we should focus of
the original version of Proslogion of St. Anselm of Catenbury to avoid the unnecessary
misinterpretations. In discussing his arguments, Anselm talked about the fool mentioned
in the book of Psalms. The fool, the Psalmist says, has said in his heart, There is no
God (Psalm 14:1; 53:1). Anselm meditated whether it is possible to convince the fool
that God exists. His response is positive. He argued that the fool understands, at least,
what is meant by the definition of God as stated by Anselm. That than which nothing
greater can be thought exists in the understanding. But if it exists only in the
understanding, we can still think of something greater than it. Therefore, it also exists in
reality. Since it is greater to exist in reality than to exist in the understanding, it follows
that that than which nothing greater can be thought exists not only in the understanding
but in reality as well. Anselms argument faced a number of criticisms. The most popular
was Gaunilons Reply on Behalf of the Fool. Gaunilon asserted that Anselms
argument gave the fool no good reason to believe that God exists.
Part II: The Maturity of Medieval Philosophy
E. Saint Bonaventure
Giovanni di Fidanza or most known as St. Bonaventure of Bagnoregio was a
Franciscan friar. St. Bonaventure is a Master of Theology at the most respected
University of Paris. In his undoubted intellect in Philosophy and Theology, St.
Bonaventure became the Minister General of the Franciscan Order and moreover became
the Cardinal of the Catholic Church. During his lifetime St. Bonaventure rose to become
one of the most prominent Philosophers in Latin Christianity. St. Bonaventure steered the
Franciscans on a moderate and intellectual course that made them the most prominent

30

order in the Catholic Church but only until the coming of the Jesuits. St. Bonaventures
theology was marked by an attempt completely to integrate faith and reason. In making
faith intelligible, St. Bonaventure must clarify its material cause. By determining the
material cause of theology is the same as settling on its subject. On the other hand,
Theology cuts across all genera and includes God, who is not confined within any genus.

Faith and Reason

St. Bonaventure held that philosophy opens the mind to at least three different routes
humans can take on their journey to God. Firstly, non-intellectual material beings
understood as the ultimate cause of a world philosophical reason can prove was created at
a first moment in time. Secondly, intellectual creatures conceived the images and
likenesses of God. St. Bonaventure argued that the workings of the human mind and will
lead us to God understood as illuminator of knowledge and donor of grace and virtue.
The final route to God is the route of being in which St. Bonaventure brought Anselm's
argument together with Aristotelian and Neoplatonic metaphysics to view God as the
absolutely perfect Being whose essence entails its existence, an absolutely simple being
that causes all other composite beings to exist.
St. Bonaventure does not explicitly address the principles of theology. St.
Bonaventure claims that Scripture adds the notion of Authority and to the faith and
authority of Scriptural revelation, theology adds proof. Theology presupposes faith but

31

adds to it rational demonstrations about matters of faith. St. Bonaventure adds that
Theology's subject is the object of belief in so far as the believable is transformed into the
notion of the intelligible and this happens by the addition of reasoning. With this juncture,
St. Bonaventure includes within theology both religious belief transformed by arguments
from natural reason and natural reason transformed by arguments based on religious
revelation. According to St. Bonaventure, Theological arguments may draw from
revelation by using revealed truths as premises and they may draw from reason by using
rational truths as premises. Philosophical reasoning has an integral place within the
domain of Bonaventurean theology. St. Bonaventure showed how philosophical
reasoning works in theology in the very structure of his disputed question On the Mystery
of the Trinity. The same mode of reasoning is found in On Reducing the Arts to
Theology. St. Bonaventure argues for each point by combining one claim based on reason
with another based on revelation, as though they were wall and buttress of the cathedral
of theology. Philosophical reasoning is an indispensible part of St. Bonaventure's faith based theology.

Accounts on Creation
In his work on the Journey, St. Bonaventure focuses upon the sensible objects of the
physical world around us. Like all beings, sensible things are understood to be signs that
ultimately can direct humans to the divine wisdom through which all things have been
made. St. Bonaventure's semiotics distinguishes four sorts of signs. For St. Bonaventure,
all creatures from rocks to angels are signs in the sense of shadows and traces of God

32

because they all bear a relation of causal dependency upon God as their Source. However,
only rational beings can have the divine as an object of their activities. For that reason
rational beings can conform themselves to the divine will and become likenesses of God.
St. Bonaventure's understanding of the physical world is heavily indebted with Biblical
account of creation. However, the most striking feature of St. Bonaventure's account of
the philosophers is the manner in which he juxtaposes the doctrine of creation, as he
understands it, with the philosophical theory of origins. According to St. Bonaventure,
only two theories regarding the origin of the cosmos are really tenable. Firstly, the theory
of the pagan philosophers according to which the world is eternal and the matter of the
universe are without ultimate causal origin. Second, St. Bonaventure refers to the
Christian doctrine of creation according to which the universe depends entirely for its
being on God, is produced from nothing and is temporally finite in the past.

F. Thomas Aquinas
St. Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274) was a Dominican priest, theologian, and
Philosopher. Called the Doctor Angelicus or the Angelic Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas is
considered one the greatest Christian philosophers to have ever lived. The Summa
Theologiae and the Summa Contra Gentiles are two of his most famous works and are the
finest examples of his work on Christian philosophy.

33

St. Thomas Aquinas first writings, primarily summaries and amplifications of his
lectures, appeared two years later. His first major work was Scripta Super Libros
Sententiarum which is consisted of commentaries on an influential work concerning the
sacraments of the church, known as the Sententiarum Libri Quatuor or the Four Books of
Sentences by the Italian theologian Peter Lombard. In 1256 Aquinas was awarded a
doctorate in theology and appointed professor of philosophy at the University of Paris.
Pope Alexander IV (reigned 1254-61) summoned him to Rome in 1259, where he acted
as adviser and lecturer to the papal court. Returning to Paris in 1268, Aquinas
immediately became involved in a controversy with the French philosopher Siger de
Brabant and other followers of the Islamic philosopher Averroes.Aquinas was influenced
by the writings of Aristotle, the Muslim Aristotelians Averroes and Avicenna, and the
Jewish philosopher Maimonides. Unlike many theologians, St. Thomas Aquinas
welcomed the Latin translation of Aristotle's complete writings. Aquinas meant to take
Aristotle's philosophical arguments to their deepest level, not just to fit them into the
existing theological framework. He pressed the distinction between potentiality and
actuality and defended immortality without diminishing the doctrine that the soul is
embodied.

Deepening of Aristotelian Philosophy

St. Thomas Aquinas definition of philosophical disciplines starts with logic
which is the mental constructions we place on our experience. St. Thomas Aquinass
Theoretical philosophy isolates what is constant in changing facts and is divided into

34

natural philosophy which is the study of objects of material processes and mathematical
philosophy. Furthermore, Mathematical philosophy is the study of quantity without need
to appeal to the sensible world and metaphysical philosophy. Metaphysics then is the
study of the non-material. Moral philosophy studies personal ethics, economics and
politics.
St. Thomas Aquinas insisted that the truths of faith and those of sense
experience as presented by Aristotle are fully compatible and complementary. Some
truths such as that of the mystery of the incarnation can be known only through revelation
and others such as that of the composition of material things only through experience
such as that of the existence of God, are known through both equally. St. Thomas
Aquinas held that knowledge originates in sensation but sense data can be made
intelligible only by the action of the intellect which elevates thought toward the
apprehension of such immaterial realities as the human soul, the angels, and God. St.
Thomas Aquinas argues that to reach understanding of the highest truths, those with
which religion is concerned, there is a vital need of the Revelation as found in the Bible.
St. Thomas Aquinas's moderate realism placed the universals firmly in the mind. St.
Thomas Aquinas is in opposition to extreme realism, which posited their independence of
human thought. St. Thomas Aquinas admitted a foundation for universals in existing
things, however, in opposition to Nominalism and conceptualism.
St. Thomas Aquinas pointed out that substance and accidents are the first
categories of the material world and material processes are shaped by the four causes.
These four causes are material cause which is the composition, formal cause which is the

35

blue print as actuality of the material cause, efficient cause which is the laborers and final
cause which is the final product or the outcome. For St. Thomas Aquinas as Aristotelian
Philosopher all material substances are composed of matter and form. St. Thomas
Aquinas rejection of Neoplatonism scandalized some of his contemporaries. St. Thomas
Aquinas was critical of the conception of humans as rational souls inhabiting powerless
and material bodies. St. Thomas Aquinas as Aristotelian Philosopher, he saw the human
being as a complete union of soul and body and of matter and form. Thus, in addition to
the survival of the soul after death, the resurrection of the body seemed philosophically
appropriate as well as religiously true.

Summa Theologica
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote a numerous volume of the Summa Theologica. In
the Part I of his great work in Summa Theologica, St. Thomas Aquinas provides his proof
of the existence of God as the uncaused cause, existent in pure actuality without
potentiality, an absolutely necessary being, an absolutely perfect being, and a rational
designer. As a point of departure of these the thoughts of the unity, infinity,
unchangeableness and goodness of the highest being are deduced. St. Thomas Aquinas
reflected that God's knowledge is absolutely perfect since He knows Himself and all
things as appointed by Him. According to St. Thomas Aquinas God wills good to every
being which exists; that is, He loves it, and love is the fundamental relation of God to the
world. St. Thomas Aquinas goes beyond traditional negative theology and states that to

36

say God is good means more than He is not evil or that He is the cause of the goodness
we see about us.
St. Thomas Aquinas discusses in the part II of the Summa Theologica his
system of ethics. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, in acts of will man strives for the
highest end, which are free acts insofar as man has in himself the knowledge of their end
and therein the principle of action. Whether the act is good or evil depends on the end. St.
Thomas Aquinas claimed that human acts are good if they promote the purpose of God
and His honor. St. Thomas Aquinas goes further by repeating a good action man acquires
a moral habit which enables him to do the good gladly and easily. However, St. Thomas
Aquinas cautioned that this is true only of the intellectual and moral virtues. St. Thomas
Aquinas proceeds that the theological virtues are imparted by God to man as dispositions
toward good and evil. St. Thomas Aquinas is certain in stating that an act becomes evil
through deviation from the reason and the divine moral law. According to St. Thomas
Aquinas, sin has its origin in the will, which decides, against reason, for a changeable
good. St. Thomas Aquinas state that as God rules in the world, the "plan of the order of
things" preexists in Him. Hence follows predestination from eternity some are destined to
eternal life and others fall short. Furthermore St. Thomas Aquinas continued that
determinism is deeply grounded in his system and on moral grounds. St. Thomas Aquinas
advocates freedom energetically but with his premises, St. Thomas Aquinas can have in
mind only the psychological form of self-motivation. St. Thomas Aquinas concluded the
part II of Summa Theologica by stating that Nothing in the world is accidental or free.

37

The theme of Part III of the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas is
Christ. St. Thomas Aquinas states that it cannot be asserted that the incarnation was
absolutely necessary. St. Thomas Aquinas further stated that since God in His omnipotent
power could have repaired human nature in many other ways but it was the most suitable
way both for the purpose of instruction and of satisfaction. For St. Thomas Aquinas, all
human potentialities are made perfect in Jesus by the vision of God. St. Thomas Aquinas
further goes that Jesus Christ's human nature was imperfect partly to make His humanity
evident. St. Thomas Aquinas stated partly because Christ would bear the general
consequences of sin for humanity. St. Thomas Aquinas explained that Christ experienced
suffering but blessedness reigned in His soul, which however, did not extend to His body.
St. Thomas Aquinas further points out that Jesus Christ, as head of humanity imparts
perfection and virtue to His members. Jesus Christ is the teacher and example of
humanity. Jesus Christs whole life and suffering as well as His work after He is exalted
serve this end. Jesus Christ's suffering bore personal character in that it proceeded out of
love and obedience. It was an offering brought to God, which as personal act had the
character of merit. Thereby Jesus Christ merited salvation for men. St. Thomas Aquinas
further explains that as Christ was exalted, can still influence men. So does Jesus Christ
still works in their behalf continually in heaven through the intercession. In this way,
Jesus Christ as head of humanity affects the forgiveness of their sins, their reconciliation
with God, their immunity from punishment, deliverance from the devil, and the opening
of Heaven's gate.

38

Hierarchy of Law
St. Thomas Aquinas' synthesis of the divisions of Law dominates his Political
philosophy. St. Thomas Aquinas maintained that Law is rational. Law is for the common
good of a communion of people. The Eternal Law in the mind of God is the exemplar of
all law and is impressed on human minds as Natural Law. In contrast stands Positive Law
which may sometimes reinforce Natural Law as pragmatic supplements to make the good
life easier or to safeguard public order. St. Thomas Aquinas departed from the traditional
Augustinian view that civil power was a remedy against our antisocial appetites. St.
Thomas Aquinas revived Aristotle's idea of the State meeting the essential demands of
human nature. For St. Thomas Aquinas, human legislation should know its limits and not
seek to cover the whole field of morality.
St. Thomas Aquinas's accomplishment was immense; his work marks one of
the few great culminations in the history of philosophy. After St. Thomas Aquinas,
Western philosophers could choose only between humbly following him and striking off
in some altogether different direction. In the centuries immediately following his death,
the dominant tendency even among Roman Catholic thinkers was to adopt the second
alternative. Interest in Thomist philosophy began to revive, however, toward the end of
the 19th century. In the encyclical Aeterni Patris or the Of the Eternal Father authored
in 1879 by Pope Leo XIII, the Pope recommended that St. Thomas's philosophy be made
the basis of instruction in all Roman Catholic schools. Pope Pius XII, in the encyclical
Humani Generis or the Of the Human Race authored in 1950, affirmed that the Thomist

39

philosophy is the surest guide to Roman Catholic doctrine and discouraged all departures
from it. Thomism remains a leading school of contemporary thought.

Part III: Critical Reflection and Reconstruction

G. John Duns Scotus
John Duns Scotus is one of the four great Philosophers of High Scholasticism.
In opposition to the prevailing thought in metaphysics that the term being is
analogical, John Duns Scotus argues that it must be a univocal term. John Duns
Scotus distinction between intuitive and abstractive cognition structured much of
the discussion of cognition for the rest of the scholastic period. John Duns Scotus
defends a moderate voluntarism in his account of free will, a view that would be
influential into the modern period of Philosophy.

Individuation
Humanity is a common nature that in instantiated both in the Philosophy of
Socrates and Plato. John Duns Scotus calls them individuals and singulars because
they cannot be divided the way humanity is instantiated. Many other Philosophers tried to
explain individuation such as St. Thomas Aquinas. St. Thomas Aquinas explains the

40

individuation of material and immaterial substances differently. Accordingly, John Duns

Scotus begins with a critical refutation of their views on the individuation of material
substances and follows this with an account of individuation that is both applicable to
material and immaterial beings. John Duns Scotus first move is to argue that material
substance is not individual on the basis of its nature. John Duns Scotus further explains
that because substance is naturally prior to accident, what explains a things being in any
hierarchical substantial ordering must itself be in the category of substance. For instance,
Plato is an individual in the species human, in the genus animal. No accident can explain
any of these features. The addition of accidents to the species human, for instance, would
not produce any individual human, but just an accidental union of the substance human
being and those accidents. John Duns Scotus clarified that actual existence is extrinsic to
any creatures nature and therefore accidental to it. The critical discussion of his
predecessors leads John Duns Scotus to conclude that what explains a substances
individuation must be something positive and intrinsic to what it individuates.
Furthermore, it cannot be something common, since what is common can exist in
something other than what it in fact exists in while what explains individuation cannot.
John Duns Scotus finally added that, it must fall into the category of substance, since
when the individuator is added, the substance is complete. It becomes then the final
element in a substances metaphysical make-up.
The Argument for Gods Existence
John Duns Scotus offers several versions of his proof of Gods existence. Scotus
argument unfolds in four stages. Firstly, that there is a first efficient cause, a preeminent

41

being, and a first final cause. Secondly, only one nature is first in these three ways.
Thirdly, a nature that is first in any of these ways is infinite. Lastly, there is only one
infinite being. John Duns Scotus argument begins in a distinctive way. At the first stage,
John Duns Scotus incorporates various strategies his predecessors used for proving Gods
existence into a stage of his single proof. Firstly, there is a first efficient cause that
produced all else but is itself unproduced. Secondly, there is a preeminent being, one
whose nature surpasses all others and thirdly, there is a first final cause or ultimate end.
At the Second Stage, John Duns Scotus argues that a being that has any one of these three
primacies will have the other two as well. At the Third Stage, John Duns Scotus proves
that a being with any of these primacies is intensively infinite. Finally at the Last Stage,
John Duns Scotus concludes that there cannot be more than one being with this triple
primacy. Since Christianity identifies God as the creator of all but himself, as the being
whose causal powers sustain the universe, as the preeminent nature who is infinitely
good, wise, and powerful, and as the ultimate end of all things, John Duns Scotus
identifies the unique being whose existence he takes himself to have proved as the
Christian God.
Argument I
Firstly, some being x is produced. Secondly, therefore x is produced by some other
being y. thirdly, either y is an unproduced, first producer or is a posterior producer.
Fourthly, a series of produced producers cannot proceed interminably. Lastly, therefore,
the series stops at an unproduced producer, a first efficient cause that produces
independently.

42

Argument II
Firstly, if there were an infinite series of essentially ordered causes, the totality of
things affected would depend on some prior cause. Secondly, nothing can be an
essentially ordered cause of itself. Thirdly, if this prior cause were part of the totality of
things affected, it would be an essentially ordered cause of itself. Therefore, lastly even if
there were an infinite series of essentially ordered causes, the totality of things affected
would be affected by a cause outside the totality.

Argument III
Firstly, Being possessed of efficient causal power does not necessarily imply
imperfection. Therefore, secondly, it is possible that something possesses efficient causal
power without imperfection. However, thirdly if nothing possesses efficient causal power
without dependence on something prior, then nothing has efficient causal power without
imperfection. Therefore, fourthly it is possible that some nature possesses independent
efficient causal power. Fifthly, a nature that possesses independent efficient causal power
is absolutely first. Therefore, lastly it is possible that there be an absolutely first efficient
causal power.

43

H. William of Ockham
William of Ockham is along with most prominent figures in the history of
philosophy during the High Middle Ages. William of Ockham is best known today for his
espousal of metaphysical Nominalism or the methodological principle known as
Ockham's Razor. Moreover, William of Ockham held important views not only in
Philosophy but also in Theology. William of Ockham is regarded as one of the most
significant logicians of the Middle Ages. As a Scholastic, William of Ockham was
strongly committed to the ideas of Aristotle, and advocated reform both in method and in
content the main aim of which was simplification. William of Ockham was a pioneer of
Nominalism, and he argued strongly that only individuals exist it may be rather than
supra-individual universals, essences or forms and that Universals are the products of
abstraction from individuals by the human mind and have no extra-mental existence.

Mental Language
William of Ockham was the first Philosopher to develop in some detail the notion of
mental language and to put it to work for him. Philosophers such as Aristotle and
Boethius had mentioned it before but William of Ockham's innovation was to

44

systematically transpose to the fine-grained analysis of human thought both the

grammatical categories of his time such as those of noun, verb, adverb, singular and
plural. For William of Ockham, written words are subordinated to spoken words and
spoken words in turn are subordinated to mental units called concepts, which can be
combined into syntactically structured mental propositions, just as spoken and written
words can be combined into audible or visible sentences.

Definitions (Real definitions and Nominal Definitions)

William of Ockham identified two kinds of definitions namely Real definitions and
Nominal definitions. Example of a Real Definition is Man is a rational animal or Man
is a substance composed of a body and an intellective soul. Each of these traditional
definitions is correct. Each in its own way expresses the essential metaphysical structure
of a human being. However, the two definitions do not signify exactly the same things.
The first one makes us think of all rational beings and all animals. The second definition
makes us think of, among other things, all substances, whereas the first one does not. It
follows therefore that an absolute term can have several distinct real definitions that do
not always signify exactly the same things. They will primarily signify exactly the same
things since they will primarily signify just what the term they define primarily signifies.
Nominal definitions in accordance to William of Ockham are different. William of
Ockham claims that there is one and only one nominal definition for any given
connotative term. The nominal definition of the connotative term brave as example is

45

a living being endowed with bravery. This reveals that brave primarily signifies
certain living beings and that it secondarily signifies or connotes singular qualities of
bravery. According to William of Ockham, any non-equivalent nominal definition is
bound to indicate a different signification and would and consequently be unsuitable if
the original one was correct.

Ockham's Razor
William of Ockham one most important contribution made to Philosophy was his
principle of Ontological Parsimony in explanation and theory building which has become
best known as "Occam's Razor". The essence of this in accordance with William of
Ockham is "Entia non sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate or " the principle states that
one should not multiply entities beyond the necessary. Alternatively, one should always
opt for an explanation in terms of the fewest possible number of causes, factors or
variables. William of Ockham visions that one should always take a bias towards
simplicity when constructing a theory and not construct unnecessary and over-elaborate
explanations. This principle of Occam's Razor is a methodological principle which
concerns ontology. Occams Razor reflects the idea that given two theories that equally
explain an idea should choose the theory which posits the minimum number of entities.
For William of Ockham, the principle of simplicity limits the multiplication of
hypotheses of not necessarily entities. Favoring the formulation It is useless to do with
more what can be done with less, Ockham implies that theories are meant to do things,
namely, explain and predict, and these things can be accomplished more effectively with

46

fewer assumptions. At one level, this is just common sense. At bottom, William of
Ockham advocates simplicity in order to reduce the risk of error. Every hypothesis carries
the possibility that it may be wrong. The more hypotheses you accept, the more you
increase your risk. William of Ockham strove to avoid error at all times. Occams Razor
helped William of Ockham earn his reputation as destroyer of the medieval synthesis of
faith and reason.

Conclusion
Philosophers such as St. Augustine of Hippo who were regarded as the greatest
Churchman Fathers, Boethius who translated the works of Plato into Latin, Peter Abelard,
John Scotus Erigena, St. Anselm of Catenbury, Bonaventure, The Price of Scholastics
Thomas Aquinas, John Duns Scotus and William of Ockham marked their name in
history of the Middle Ages in discovering the truth about God. These philosophers
contributed by paving the way we understand philosophy today. Even though they are not
the first to conceptualize their respective contribution since it had been started by their
Greek predecessors, they are the ones who struggled to shape the Greek philosophies to
where it is now and shining brightly in the heart of Catholism. Because of these medieval
philosophers, Christianity developed vastly into communities. The education reborn as
the Catholic Church began to build great Universities and the Clergies and Churchmen
forefront education and control over not just intellectual but also political powers.

47

References
Maurer, Armand (1962).Medieval Philosophy. Random House, Incorporated. New York
Knowles, David (1962). The Evolution of Medieval Thought. A Knoff, Incorporated and
random House Incorporated. New York.
Aspell, Patrick J. (1999). Medieval Western Philosophy: The European Emergence.
Gilson, Etienne (1955). History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages. Random
House Incorporated. New York.
Aspell, Patrick (1999) Medieval Western Philosophy: The European Emergence. The
Council for Research in Values and philosophy. Washington D.C. United States of
America.
Spade, Paul V. (1994) Five Text on Medieval Problem of Universals
Stumpf, Samuel Enoch (1999) Socrates to Sartre: A History of Philosophy. McGraw-Hill
Companies, Incorporated. Singapore.
Marenbon, John. (1988). Early Medieval Philosophy. London and New York: Routledge.
Baird, Forrest and Kaufman Walter (1997) Medieval Philosophy: Philosophic Classics.
2nd Edition. Volume II. Pretice Hall, Incorporated. New Jersey, United States of America.
Borombon, John (1998). History of philosophy: Medieval philosophy. Volume III.
Routlegdge London.
Cultural Heritage and Contemporary Change Series I, Culture and Values, Volume 9.
George F. McLean, General Editor. Washington, D.C.: The Council for Research in
Values and Philosophy.

48

Jones, W.T. (1952). The Middle Mind: A history of Western Philosophy, 2 nd Edition.
Harcourt, Brace and Word, Inc. New York.
MacDonald, Scott and Norman Kretzmann (1998). Medieval philosophy. In E. Craig

49