The Philosophical Originality of a Theologian

Anna Zhyrkova

doi:10.35765/forphil.2012.1702.15

Abstract

This paper explores possible reasons for the comparatively low estimation of the potential philosophical significance of Byzantine theological thought, which, in contemporary studies, is frequently viewed as lacking philosophical depth and originality. The ultimate question here, though, is whether we should grant that theology may, in fact, contain original and valuable philosophy. In order to subject the issues involved to scrutiny, I undertake an analysis of the important case of the legacy of John of Damascus, which, in my opinion, actually furnishes some answers to these questions.

Highlights

K John of Damascus; originality in philosophy; originality in theology e impulse to write this article came to me as a result of having read a review of a book devoted to the history of Byzantine philosophy. e reviewer was quite disappointed, because in a book which, in his opinion, ought to have been concerned with philosophical issues sensu stricto, he had found nothing but a cluster of theological conceptions, with no original philosophical element
No ma er how deeply I disagree with opinions of this sort, I would like to explore the possible reasons for such a comparatively low estimation of the potential philosophical significance of Byzantine theological thought—and, on many other occasions of theological thought generally
Do we normally assume that a theologian cannot be original, if his discussions should lead him to be engaged in philosophy? Can theology contain original and valuable philosophy? And what, do we mean by using the terms “original” and “originality” in connection with philosophical and theological thought?

Summary

Introduction

K John of Damascus; originality in philosophy; originality in theology e impulse to write this article came to me as a result of having read a review of a book devoted to the history of Byzantine philosophy. e reviewer was quite disappointed, because in a book which, in his opinion, ought to have been concerned with philosophical issues sensu stricto, he had found nothing but a cluster of theological conceptions, with no original philosophical element.

Results

Conclusion