A Maimonidean Critique of Thomistic Analogy

On the question of language about God, Moses Maimonides and Thomas Aquinas propose directly opposing viewpoints. Whereas Aquinas explicitly argues in favour of an analogical use and against an equivocal use, Maimonides on the contrary argues against an analogical use and in favour of an equivocal use of terms when applied to God. Although their respective concepts of analogical meaning appear to differ, I argue on the basis of an analysis of the criteria for analogical predication implicit in each that a thomistic concept of analogical predication is reducible to a maimonidean concept. Thus, it follows that the explicit critique Maimonides lodges against an analogical use of terms when applied to God, if defensible, can be shown to be successful against Aquinas' proposal for analogical language of God. On this basis I conclude that there is a significant and defensible philosophical difference between Aquinas and Maimonides on language about God.