Abstract
Upholding a univocity theory of religious language does not entail idolatry, because nothing about univocity entails misidentifying God altogether— which is what idolatry amounts to. Upholders and opponents of univocity can agree on the object to which they are ascribing various att ributes, even if they do not agree on the att ributes themselves. Neither does the defender of univocity have to maintain that there is anything real really shared by God and creatures. Furthermore, even if much of language is analogous, syllogistic argument—and hence theology’s scientifi c status, as accepted by the scholastics—requires univocity.
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.
