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

Conclusion n We can now sum up some of the basic features of the Idea (of being) that justify both the title and content of our study. An attentive consideration and analysis of the Idea shows that it has two sides: from one side it looks at the infinite, from the other the finite. Its infinite and therefore most valuable side is based on three points: (1) Nothing can be understood without the thought of being: the Idea has therefore an unlimited openness. (2) In the Idea, being itself is given to be thought: this makes the objectivity of knowledge possible and speaks, at the same time, of the structure of being itself. (3) It is independent of all finite intelligences and can, therefore, be present to all without requiring any particular one in order to exist: it is therefore an appurtenance of Absolute Being, of God. At the other side of each of these features, the Idea presents a finite face, which could be summarized thus: (1) It shows everything in a potential, initial way: in the case of human nature it is not the only means of knowledge, but it requires sensations, or feelings, in the widest meaning of the term. (2) Thanks to it, intelligent beings are granted a share of what they are not, that is, of what is other than themselves but of what they closely resemble; and, again thanks to it, there is a likeness of Absolute Being in the finite person. (3) Its presence indicates and ensures the irreducible distance and distinction between the finite and the infinite: the intelligence to which it is present with the mentioned characteristics must be finite. Finally, the Idea shows that although the infinite is in no need of the finite to exist, the finite is in need of the infinite.That way, both the difference of the finite and the infinite and the dependence of the one on the other are secured.  n Contemporary philosophy is to a great extent conditioned by the selection of a given methodology. This leads not only to a very particular kind of specialization, but also to a more or less admitted impossibility to reach certain theses and to deal with certain problems. Thought is therefore often held back, and legitimate conclusions risk being rejected “on methodological or epistemological grounds.” In such a context, detailed and restricted argumentation is preferred to insight and contemplation, thus quenching the source of reaching further truths. We might be frequently shown many of the trees in the forest, although seldom the most beautiful ones. Undoubtedly, in any case, a minimum acquaintance with the forest itself, and its unity, is often missing. For that reason, we have moved from gnoseology to general ontology , without forgetting to highlight the connection with ethics and anthropology. Metaphysics can also profit from the solution of the problem of knowledge, since participation, which is an alternative name for creation, and probably a more adequate one in a philosophical discussion, is made possible thanks to the Idea, which possesses not only an epistemological value, but also a metaphysical one. Finally , the conclusion about personal dignity involves ontology (the study of being in general), metaphysics (the study of real being), and anthropology (the study of man). Rosmini offers a remarkable example of how this can be done. It is more important to see the whole, instead of each part in its individual complexity. Certainly not because the philosopher we have chosen as companion and guide had not also busied himself with careful and detailed analysis of each of his theses; he did so, and in such a way that has remained without parallel to our days. In this work I tried to take a step backward and “see the forest,” making a serious effort to show that the main philosophical fields are necessarily linked together. The reader will judge if this goal has been at least partially attained.  ⁄ Conclusion ...

Share