No description available.

La présente étude s’emploie à reconstruire et à analyser la conception eckhartienne de l’auto-intellection de Dieu, afin de mettre en évidence les divers enjeux de cette question, et par suite de mesurer l’importance exacte qu’elle revêt dans l'œuvre et la pensée du Maître rhénan – surtout quant à son effort spéculatif pour accuser la réalité métaphysique de l’Intellect divin et rendre compte de son opérativité. L’ensemble de cette recherche se fonde sur un extrait du Sermon allemand 80, qui expose avec force et concision la richesse de l’intellectualité de Dieu à travers l’étendue de son acte d’auto-intellection, et propose ainsi une vue synoptique d’un traitement systématique de la question. Dans cette perspective, il s’agit en outre de montrer la cohérence systématique de la métaphysique eckhartienne du flux – caractéristique de l’école albertinienne –, qui correspond à une logique de l’actualité et de la productivité de l’Intellect divin, en établissant alors le lien causal et progressif entre : 1. la définition de Dieu comme intellectus per essentiam (un leitmotiv de la pensée spéculative d’Eckhart), 2. l’acte pur d’auto-intellection qui traduit son intelligere, 3. la procession des Personnes in divinis comme déploiement formel de cet acte (bullitio), et 4. l’émanation des créatures comme mouvement proversif de l’Intellect divin s’intelligeant lui-même, et exerçant de la sorte sa causalité créatrice (ebullitio). Cette étude permet dès lors de dégager une triple considération de l’acte d’auto-intellection de Dieu comme Pensée substantielle et subsistante, comme Pensée trinitaire et bouillonnante, et enfin comme Pensée créatrice et débordante / The present study is devoted to the reconstruction and the analysis of the Eckhartian conception of God’s self-knowledge, so as to emphasize the diverse stakes of this question, and to measure the exact importance which it hold in the work and the thought of Rhenish Master – especially concerning his speculative effort to describe the metaphysical reality of the divine Intellect and to report its operativity. The whole of this research bases on an extract of the German Sermon 80, which explains with strength and conciseness the wealth of God’s intellectuality trough the area of his act of self-knowledge, and so propose a synoptic view of a systematic treatment about this topic. Furthermore, the question is whether to show the systematic coherence of the Eckhartian metaphysics of flow – characteristic of the Albertian school –, which corresponds to one logic of the actuality and the productivity of the divine Intellect, establishing then the causal and progressive link between: 1. The definition of God as intellectus per essentiam (a leitmotiv of Eckhart’s speculative thought, 2. The pure act of self-knowledge, which translates God’s intelligere, 3. The procession of the Persons in divinis as formal deployment of this act (bullitio), and 4. The emanation of creatures as exteriorized movement of the divine Intellect knowing itself, and so exercising its creative causality (ebullitio). This study allows consequently to draw a triple consideration of the act of God's self-knowledge as substantial and subsisting Thought, as Trinitarian and boiling, and finally as creative and overboiling

Typescript, etc. / Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

Thesis (M.A.)--Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, 1988. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 87-95).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 1983. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 185-187). Available online via OhioLINK's ETD Center

Some comparative studies of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas put emphasis on the similarities between Aristotelian and Thomistic metaphysics. In this study, however, I have attempted to show a salient difference; a respect in which Thomas's system cannot accommodate certain Aristotelian tenets. I have argued that, although Thomas tries to incorporate Aristotle's account of intellection, he cannot consistently do so. For an integration of this sort entails that the created intellect is identical with God when it contemplates him. This, however, is a conclusion that would rightly be rejected as metaphysically implausible in Thomas's system. Aristotle's view of intellection entails that the intellect is identical with whatever it contemplates when that object possesses no matter. For, intellection, which is itself immaterial, assumes the form of whatever it contemplates, and furthermore, matter is what individuates distinct entities that share the same form. If all this is so, then the human intellect becomes identical with Aristotle's god when it contemplates him. In Aristotle's system, this would not present any problems, for a very interesting reason: Aristotle, on an interpretation of his thought that seems textually plausible, teaches that part of the human mind is identical with divine intellect, or nous; that this part is "implanted" in the human being "from outside" and is the most divine part?and so, part of the human being can rightly be said to be eternal.1 Thomas, however, in accordance with Christian doctrine, holds that the human intellect has its own created identity, and differs numerically from person to person. But Thomas's adoption of prominent theses from Aristotle's account of intellection unfortunately entails that the human intellect, in contemplatio, becomes identical with God, since God is immaterial and identical with his essence. After looking at some possible solutions, I argue that this is not a desirable outcome in Thomas's Christian metaphysic, for several good reasons.

Thesis (M.A.)--Kuo li Taiwan shi fan da xue. / Mimeo, copy. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis--Lund. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 146-152).

Issued also as thesis, Fribourg. / Bibliography: p. 190-193.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2001. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 82-87). Available also in a digital version from Dissertation Abstracts.