Talk:Joannes Philoponus
In sum (commenting on my own piece), one could say that Philoponus anticipates a MODE OF CONCEPTUALISATION that, in adumbrating important nominalist themes in Ockham, Biel et al (the ABSOLUTE SOVEREIGNTY AND CONTINGENCY OF THE WILL OF GOD in regard to all created existence __as well as the NON-ESSENTIALITY OF CREATED FORM), sidesteps and marginalises Aristotle and Medieval Scholasticism almost one thousand years before the main-stream began to follow on in his wake.
Also, given the influence of this strand of thought on Luther and the Calvinist divines, this is a Catholic thinker who left a legacy with strongly Protestant resonances. To a sympathetic observer, all this is praiseworthy; to others (even a feminist critic like Carolyn Merchant) it is PROTO-REIFICATION!!
Where do I Stand?!
How do Protestantism and Nominalism stand with respect to 'prehistories' of the Enlightenment? As a 'psychic Catholic' (in the same sense as when CG Jung once characterised himself as a 'Catholic Protestant'), I see Philoponus' position in the history of thought as a (relatively tenable) HEGELIAN MOMENT.
But only relatively so!!
Which Sergius does the article refers to? Melaen
Start a discussion about improving the Joannes Philoponus page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "Joannes Philoponus" page.
