Abstract
The article is devoted to refuting Yuri Chornomorets’ criticism of Thomism as contradicto-ry and archaic philosophical approach. It is proved (1) that Chornomorets’ depreciation of Thomism (as «dry rationality» opposite to the phenomenology’s «living experience», or as rational «blindness» opposite to the sharp-eyed «intuitive look») is purely rhetorical and can not be regarded as a rational argument. (2) The so-called «main aporia of Thomism» disclosed by Y. Chornomorets is based on a superficial interpretation of St. Thomas’ texts. Aquinas in fact did not deny (2a) the intuitionism, (2b) the possibility of intellectual evidence, (2c) the intuitive knowledge. The intuitive knowledge has very important place (though not central) in the St. Thomas’ doctrine. The paper also shows that Y. Chornomorets wrongly identifies (3a) intellectual intuition with phenomenological attitude, (3b) Thomistic realism with abstract intellectualism cut off from real things, (4) rests on the oversimplified understanding of phe-nomenology, and (5) confuses the transition from the natural to the supernatural knowledge with the transition from the natural to the phenomenological attitude.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
