In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

THE THOMISTIC DOCTRINE OF THE THREE DEGREES OF FORMAL ABSTRACTION THE PROBLEM THERE is current controversy among Thomists as to the Thomistic authenticity of the doctrine of intellectual abstraction as presented by Cajetan and John of St. Thomas.1 According to these traditional commentators there is, first of all, a twofold distinction between total abstraction (abstractio totalis, the abstraction of a logical whole from its subjective parts) and formal abstraction (abstractio formalis , the abstraction of an intelligible object from the matter which shrouds its intelligibility). There is, further, a threefold distinction between types of formal abstraction (each depending upon the distinct degree of matter from which the intelligible 1 It is not the purpose of this paper to trace the development of this controversy. However, it may be fitting, for purposes of orientation, to indicate some of the literature contributing to it. Principal among the earlier articles on it were these three: L.-M. Regis, 0. P., "La Philosophie de Ia Nature. Quelques apories," Etude.' et Researches, Cahier I: Philosophie (1986), 1f!7-156; L.-B. Geiger, 0. P., "Abstraction et separation d'ap1·es S. Thomas," Revue des Sciences Philosophiquea et Theologiques, XXXI (1947), 8-40; J.-D. Robert, 0. P., "La Metaphysique, science distincte de toute autre discipline selon S. Thomas d'Aquin," Divus Thomas, L (1947), 206-222. These were followed shortly by two significant articles: M.-V. Leroy, 0. P., "Abstractio et separatio d'apres un texte controverse de Saint Thomas (In Lib. Boeth. de Trin., V, 3 & 4) ," Revue Thomiste, XLVIII (1948), 828-389; M.-D. Philippe, 0. P., "Abstraction, addition, separation dans Ia philosophie d'Aristote," Revue Thomiste, XLVIII (1948), 461-479. More recent articles on the subject include: F. G. Connolly, "Science vs. Philosophy," The Modern Schoolman, XXIX (1952), 197-209, and "Abstraction and Moderate Realism," The New Scholasticism, XXVII (1958), 72-90; V. Smith, "Abstraction and the Empiriological Method," Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association , XXVI (1952), 85-50; G. Van Riet, "La theorie thomiste de !'abstraction," Revue Philosophique de Louvain, L (1952), 358-398; P. Merlan, "Abstraction and Metaphysics in St. Thomas' Summa," Journal of the History of Ideas, XIV (1958), 284-291; W. Kane, 0. P., "Abstraction and the Distinction of the Sciences," The Thomist, XVII (1954), 48-68; E. Simmons, "In Defense of Total and Formal 87 88 EDWARD D. SIMMONS object is abstracted) . Total abstraction is common to all the sciences, while each type of formal abstraction is proper to a distinct level of science as specificative of that level. Physical abstraction, the first degree of formal abstraction, is proper to natural science; mathematical abstraction, the second degree of formal abstraction, is proper to mathematics; and metaphysical abstraction, the third degree of formal abstraction, is proper to metaphysics.2 Many have questioned the Thomistic authenticity of this presentation on the basis of St. Thomas' own presentation of the doctrine in the third article of the fifth question of his Commentary on the De Trinitate of Boethius. In this highly significant and somewhat controversial article St. Thomas begins by distinguishing between abstraction, generally taken, according to simple apprehension and according to negative judgment. He calls the first an abstraction, strictly taken, and the second a separation. He further distinguishes between Abstraction," The New Schola.stism, XXIX (1955), 4~7-440; F. Cunningham, S. J.1 "A Theory on Abstraction in St. Thomas," The Modern Schoolman, XXXV (1958), ~49-~70. A highly significant brief treatment of the problem is found in J. Maritain, Exi.•tence and the Existent. trans. L. Galentiere and G. Phelan (New York, 1948), pp. ~8-1!0, note 14. Other notes are found in G. Klubertanz, S. J., The Philosophy of Nature, p. 400, note 19; F. Wilhelmsen, Man.'s Knowledge of Reality (Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1956), pp. 194-195, note 8. Extended treatments are found in E, Simmons, The Thomistic Doctrine of Abstraction for the Three Levels of Science; Exposition and Defense (University of Notre Dame doctoral dissertation, 195~, published by University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich.); F. Wilson, S. J., The Modes of Abstraction According to St. Thomas Aquinas (Georgetown University doctoral dissertation, 1949, unpublished) . • Cajetan, In De Ente et Essentia, prooem., q. I...

pdf

Share