Cette thèse poursuit une étude de l’ontologie de Dietrich de Freiberg, à la lumière du débat arabo-latine autour de la « distinction réelle » entre l’être et l’essence. L’enjeu principal est de montrer comment la doctrine du maître allemand, défendant vigoureusement les principes de l’ontologie aristotélico-averroïste, s’offre comme alternative aux doctrines ancrées sur la thèse de la distinction réelle de la fin du XIIIème siècle, à l’Université de Paris. La première partie analyse le contexte historique et doctrinal dans lequel s’inscrit la réflexion de Dietrich : d’abord, la critique averroïste à la conception « avicennienne » de l’étant aristotélicien, et ensuite, le premier jalon de la dispute latine, constitué par la critique de Siger de Brabant aux défenseurs de la distinction réelle (parmi eux, Thomas d’Aquin). La deuxième partie étudie, en premier lieu, un des arguments centraux dans la discussion, à savoir, l’argument de l’« intellectus essentiae », et s’occupe ensuite de l’examen de son refus de la part de Dietrich. Finalement, la troisième partie considère l’ontologie de Dietrich dans ses traits fondamentaux, à la lumière de sa vision critique envers les thèses centrales des défenseurs de la distinction réelle. / This thesis pursues a study of Dietrich of Freiberg’s ontology, in the light of the Arabian-Latin debate about “real distinction” between existence and essence. The main concern is to show how the doctrine of the german master, defending strongly the principles of the Aristotelian-Averroïst ontology, offers itself as an alternative to the doctrines fixed on the thesis of real distinction at the end of the XIIIth century, at the University of Paris. The first part analyzes the historic and doctrinal background in which the reflection of Dietrich is placed: first, Averroes’ criticism to Avicenna’s conception of Aristotelian being, and then, the first milestone of the Latin quarrel, constituted by Siger’s criticism to the defenders of the real distinction (among them, Thomas Aquinas). The second part examines, first of all, one of the central arguments in the discussion, namely, the “intellectus essentiae” argument, and then deals with the examination of Dietrich’s refusal of it. Finally, the third part considers the ontology of Dietrich in its fundamental features, in the light of its critical vision regarding the main theses of the defenders of real distinction.

Heterodox master of liberal arts and theirs discussions with Thomas Aquinas Mgr. Miroslav Severa Summary: The proposed thesis deals with two important issues discussed by Tomas Aquinas in connection with the averroistic controversy that occurred in the second half of the thirteenth century in Paris. The topics are On the eternity of the world and On the unity of intellect. Its author defends the position that concerning the problem On the eternity of the Word is the solution proposed by Thomas Aquinas closer to the position of heterodox masters of liberal arts then to the attitude of some orthodox theologians. The heterodox teaching On the unity of intellect is by Thomas sufficiently disproven. The doctrine of Thomas Aquinas doesn't need to always constitute an irreconcilable antithesis against the attitude of heterodox masters as it is described by some authors. The thesis also deals the two topics on the historical background of the condemnations issued by the Parisian bishop Stephan Tempier in the years 1270 and 1277. Although the heterodox masters of liberal arts are in their philosophizing strongly influenced by the Arab philosopher Averroes theirs position concerning the relationship between fides and ratio is different. Averroes says that when the conflict between reason and revelation occurs than...