Rezeption und Interpretation der aristotelischen Politica im späten Mittelalter (review)

Abstract

BOOK REVIEWS 5t7 Averroists have misinterpreted Aristotle. In order to clarify this argument, Mclnerny offers in his essays a careful explanation of Aquinas's interpretation of Aristotle's philosophical accounts of the soul, the senses, the intellect, and the relations between the human body and soul. Reminiscent of Mandonnet's division of Aquinas's shorter works into theology or phiiosophy,~ Mclnerny argues that there is a great divide between the theological and philosophical writings of Aquinas (155). Theology has to do with revelation and philosophy with reasoning in the public domain (158). His point is that since Aquinas attempts to offer a correct account of Aristotle in his De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas, this text is one of philosophy and not theology 056 and 162). But what about recent claims that such a dichotomy is unfaithful to Aquinas? For example, Mark Jordan argues that if we look at the use to which Aquinas puts philosophy , he appears to have transformed philosophy into theology.3 In fact, Aquinas makes a claim in his Summa theologiae (ST) that implies he studied Aristotle for a theological purpose. When considering whether religious orders should be established for the study of science, he notes the use to which their members should put philosophy . He argues that since their entire lives are devoted to the service of God, they should only direct themselves to philosophical texts to such a degree that they can apply what they find to sacred teaching (ST, 2-2. 188.5.ad 3). Since Aquinas was a member of such a religious order, McInerny ought to consider whether Aquinas is writing theology and not philosophy. If Aquinas wrote his De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas in order to demonstrate that Aristotle is not opposed to Christian faith, he is defending the use of Aristotle in sacred teaching and thus has transformed philosophy into theology. Aquinas against the Averroists is a welcome addition to that small but growing body of medieval texts in translation. McInerny and the editors of the Purdue University Series in the History of Philosophy are to be commended for providing a bilingual edition of Aquinas's De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas. The commentary provided and the summary of recent research into the historical context should be useful both for students and scholars. JOHN INGLIS University of Dayton Christoph Fliieler. Rezeption und Interpretation der Aristotelischen Politica im spiiten Mittelalter . Volumes i and 2. Bochumer Studien zur Phiiosophie, Band 19. Amsterdam: B. R. Griiner, 1992. Pp. xv + 335 (Volume l); vi + 2o9 (Volume 2). Cloth, $148.oo. These scholarly and intelligent volumes make several valuable contributions to research in an important field. (For recent evidence of the variety and originality of 9Thomas Aquinas, Opuscu/aOmnia, 5 vols, ed. P. Mandonnet (Paris: Lethielleux, 1927). aMark Jordan, "Theology and Philosophy," in The CambridgeCompaniontoAquinas, eds. Norman Kretzmann and Eleonore Stump (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 235- 518 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 33:3 JULY 1995 medieval political Aristotelianism, see James Blythe's Ideal Government and the Mixed Constitution in the Middle Ages.) Most broadly useful will be the detailed census of medieval commentaries on the Politics and the Pseudo-Aristotelian Economica occupying the second volume. Manuscripts and editions are identified and described in helpful detail for 14o commentaries, and references are given to another 62. In addition-or subtraction--several manuscripts previously thought to be commentaries on the Politics or Economica are revealed not to be such, or not to be by the authors to whom they have previously been attributed. Besides significantly augmenting the coverage of these works in the pioneering catalogue of Charles Lohr, Christoph Fliieler provides lists of questions for twenty-four "commentaries in question form," that is, works in which the Aristotelian text serves as point of departure for the author's own engagement with substantive issues. The questions, often fascinating, are few in some cases, well over a hundred in others. Of the two dozen commentaries of this type, only four have been printed. In his first volume FlOeler focuses on the influence of the Politics on medieval discussions of servitude (servitus). After a concise "before and after" analysis, suggesting that Aristotle's defense of the naturalness of...