Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Wrocławski Przegląd Teologiczny

Vol. 33 No. 2 (2025): A Tribute to Thomas Aquinas

Philosophy

St. Thomas Aquinas’s Ens Commune as Genus Omnium Supremum

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52097/wpt.10316  [Google Scholar]
Published: 2026-01-05

Abstract

This paper aims to demonstrate whether Aquinas’s concept of “common being” (ens commune), as it emerged widely among scholastic metaphysicians, provides a theoretical basis for being reconciled with the concept of “the highest genus of all” (genus omnium supremum). The main focus of this study is to understand the underlying resemblance of these concepts, based on Aquinas’s selected works, both the In Metaphysicam Aristotelis and In Librum Beati Dionysii De Divinis Nominibus. The Author proposes either an analytical reconstruction or a metaphysical lens for examining this topic, presenting additional approaches to the study of ens commune. The correlation between ens commune and genus omnium supremum seems quite plausible, though in certain respects. It is generally accepted that Aquinas’s ens commune refers exclusively to the abstracted concept of common being, encompassing all real beings in terms of existence (secundum esse), while genus omnium supremum would be a broader and still higher concept, encompassing all varieties of beings, even those of the intentional order (secundum rationem). It seems likely that Aquinas’s Commentaries may convincingly reveal that the concept of ens commune has a broader scope than merely referring to diverse real beings and their properties. Arguing in favor of this thesis, the Author strives to demonstrate that the concept of ens commune corresponds to all beings considered from a cognitive perspective, not only the existential one, but also a perspective covering all denominations of being in whatever form of their existence, namely combining both real being (ens reale) and being of reason (ens rationis) into one, unique, intelligible concept.

References

  1. Aertsen, Jan A. “Why is Metaphysics Called ‘First Philosophy’ in the Middle Ages?” In The Science of Being as Being: Metaphysical Investigations, edited by Gregory T. Doolan, 53–69. Studies in Philosophy and the History of Philosophy. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt28504n.6 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aristoteles. De interpretatione vel Periermenias: Translatio Boethii: Specimina translationum recentiorum. Edited by Laurentius Minio-Paluello. Translatio Guillelmi de Moerbeka. Edited by Gerardus Verbeke. Aristoteles Latinus, 2,1–2. Bruges: Desclée De Brouwer, 1965. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aristotle. Metaphysics. Edited by W. D. Ross and J. A. Smith. The Works of Aristotle 8. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1908. [Google Scholar]
  4. Aristotle. On the Soul, Parva Naturalia, On Breath. Translated by W. S. Hett. London: William Heinemann; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1935. [Google Scholar]
  5. Aristotle. The Physics. With an English Translation. Translated by Philip H. Wicksteed and Francis M. Cornford. 2 vols. London: William Heinemann; New York: G. P. Putnam, 1929. [Google Scholar]
  6. Aristotle’s Pior and Posterior Analytics: A Revised Text. With a commentary by W. D. Ross. With an introduction by W. D. Ross. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957. [Google Scholar]
  7. Averrois. “Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis Metaphysicorum libros.” In Aristotelis Metaphysicorum libri XIIII cum Averrois Cordubensis in eosdem commentariis, Aristotelis opera cum Averrois commentariis 8. Venetiis: Apud Iunctas, 1562. [Google Scholar]
  8. Boulnois, Olivier. Être et représentation: Une généalogie de la métaphysique moderne à l’époque de Duns Scot (XIIIe–XIVe siècle). Épiméthée. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  9. Burrell, David. “Classification, Mathematics, and Metaphysics: A Commentary on St. Thomas Aquinas’s Exposition of Beothius’s On the Trinity.” The Modern Schoolman 44, no. 1 (1966): 13–34. https://doi.org/10.5840/schoolman19664412. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/schoolman19664412 [Google Scholar]
  10. Carl, Brian T. “The Transcendentals and the Divine Names in Thomas Aquinas.” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 92, no. 2 (2018): 225–47. https://doi.org/10.5840/acpq2018313148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/acpq2018313148 [Google Scholar]
  11. Caston, Victor. “Aristotle’s Two Intellects: A Modest Proposal.” Phronesis 44, no. 3 (1999): 199–227. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685289960500033. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15685289960500033 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cohoe, Caleb Murray. “Nous in Aristotle’s De Anima.” Philosophy Compass 9, no. 9 (2014): 594–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12156 [Google Scholar]
  13. Crivelli, Paolo. Plato’s Account of Falsehood: A Study of the Sophist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  14. Darge, Ralf. “Ens in quantum ens: Die Erklärung des Subjekts der Metaphysik bei F. Suárez.” Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie médiévales 66, no. 2 (1999): 335–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.66.2.530070 [Google Scholar]
  15. De Libera, Alain. “The Oxford and Paris Traditions in Logic.” In The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy: From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Disintegration of Scholasticism, 1100–1600, edited by Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, Jan Pinborg, and Eleonore Stump, 174–87. Cambridge University Press, 1982. https://doi.org/10.1017/chol9780521226059.010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521226059.010 [Google Scholar]
  16. Doig, James C. Aquinas on Metaphysics: A Historico-Doctrinal Study of the Commentary on the Metaphysics. The Hague: M. Nijhof, 1972. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2853-0 [Google Scholar]
  17. Doolan, Gregory T. “Aquinas on Separate Substances and the Subject Matter of Metaphysics.” Documenti e studi sulla tradizione ilosoica medievale 22 (2011): 347–82. [Google Scholar]
  18. Doyle, John P. “Between Transcendental and Transcendental: The Missing Link?” Review of Metaphysics 50, no. 4 (1987): 783–815. [Google Scholar]
  19. Doyle, John P. “The Borders of Knowability: Thoughts From or Occasioned by Seventeenth-Century Jesuits.” In Die Logik des Transzendentalen: Festschrift für Jan A. Aertsen zum 65. Geburtstag, edited by Martin Pickavé, 643–58. Miscellanea Mediaevalia 30. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1515/ 9783110204582.7.643. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110204582.7.643 [Google Scholar]
  20. Doyle, John P. “‘Extrinsic Cognoscibility’: A Seventeenth-Century Supertranscendental Notion.” The Modern Schoolman 68, no. 1 (1990): 57–80. https://doi.org/10.5840/schoolman19906814. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/schoolman19906814 [Google Scholar]
  21. Doyle, John P. “Suarez on the Reality of the Possibles.” The Modern Schoolman 45, no. 1 (1967): 29–48. https://doi.org/10.5840/schoolman19674512. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/schoolman19674512 [Google Scholar]
  22. Doyle, John P. “Suárez on the Unity of a Scientific Habit.” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 65, no. 3 (1991): 311–34. https://doi.org/10.5840/acpq 199165312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/acpq199165312 [Google Scholar]
  23. Dumont, Stephen D. “Scotus’s Doctrine of Univocity and the Medieval Tradition of Metaphysics.” In Was ist Philosophie im Mittelalter?, edited by Jan A. Aertsen and Andreas Speer, 193–212. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110801453.193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110801453.193 [Google Scholar]
  24. Elders, Leo J. The Metaphysics of Being of St. Thomas Aquinas in a Historical Perspective. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1993. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004451896 [Google Scholar]
  25. Elorduy, Eleuterio. “Duns Scoti influxus in Francisci Suárez doctrinam.” In Acta Congressus Scotistici Internationalis Oxonii et Edimburgi: De doctrina Joannis Duns Scoti, 307–37. Scotismus decursu saeculorum 4. Rome: Antonianum, 1968. [Google Scholar]
  26. Ertl, Wolfgang. “‘Kant und die Scholastik heute’. Vorüberlegungen zu einer Neueinschätzung.” The Geibun-Kenkyu: Journal of Arts and Letters 105, no. 2 (2013): 20–40. [Google Scholar]
  27. Esposito, Costantino. “The Hidden Influence of Suárez on Kant’s Transcendental Conception of ‘Being’, ‘Essence’, and ‘Existence’.” In Suárez’s Metaphysics in Its Historical and Systematic Context, edited by Lukáš Novák, 117–34. Series Contemporary Scholasticism 2. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110354423.117 [Google Scholar]
  28. Fabro, Cornelio. Participation et causalité Selon S. Thomas d’Aquin. Louvain: Publications universitaires de Louvain, 1961. [Google Scholar]
  29. Forlivesi, Marco. “Approaching the Debate on the Subject of Metaphysics from the Later Middle Ages to the Early Modern Age: The Ancient and Medieval Antecedents.” Medioevo 34 (2009): 9–60. [Google Scholar]
  30. Furlong, Peter. “Reason in Context: The Latin Avicenna and Aquinas on the Relationship between God and the Subject of Metaphysics.” Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 83 (2009): 129–40. https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc20098311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc20098311 [Google Scholar]
  31. Gerson, Lloyd P. “The Unity of Intellect in Aristotle’s De Anima.” Phronesis 49, no. 4 (2004): 348–73. https://doi.org/10.1163/1568528043067005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/1568528043067005 [Google Scholar]
  32. Gilson, Étienne. “Éléments d’une métaphysique thomiste de l’être.” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge 40 (1973): 7–36. [Google Scholar]
  33. Grier, Michelle. Kant’s Doctrine of Transcendental Illusion. Modern European Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  34. Haldane, John J. “Aquinas on Sense-Perception.” The Philosophical Review 92, no. 2 (1983): 233–39. https://doi.org/10.2307/2184927. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2184927 [Google Scholar]
  35. Harrington, Michael. “The Divine Name of Wisdom in the Dionysian Commentary Tradition.” Dionysius 35 (2017): 105–33. [Google Scholar]
  36. Hennig, Boris. “Form and Function in Aristotle.” History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis 23, no. 2 (2020): 317–37. https://doi.org/10.30965/26664275-02302003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30965/26664275-02302003 [Google Scholar]
  37. Hochschild, Joshua P. “Aquinas’s Two Concepts of Analogy and a Complex Semantics for Naming the Simple God.” The Thomist 83, no. 2 (2019): 155–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/tho.2019.0013 [Google Scholar]
  38. Inaven, Andreas. “Suárez’ Widerlegung des scotistischen Körperlichkeitsform.” In P. Franz Suarez S. J. Gedenkblätter zu seinem dreihundertjährigen Todestag, 123–46. Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1917. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ioannis a Sancto Thoma. “Ars Logica seu forma et materia ratiocinandi.” In Cursus Philosophicus Thomisticus, secundam exactam, veram, genuinam Aristotelis et Doctoris Angelici mentem, edited by Beato Reiser. Taurini: Ex Officina Domus Editorialis Marietti, 1930. [Google Scholar]
  40. Joannes Duns Scoti. “Quodlibeta III.” In Obras del Doctor Sutil Juan Duns Escoto: Cuestiones cuodlibetales, edited by Félix Alluntis, Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1968. [Google Scholar]
  41. Joannes Duns Scotus. Quaestiones in Libros IV, V, VI, VII, VIII Physicorum Aristotelis, in Libros Aristotelis De Anima. Vol. 3 of Opera Omnia. Parisiis: apud Ludovicum Vivès, Bibliopolam Editorem, 1891. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kant, Immanuel. The Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804649 [Google Scholar]
  43. Kant, Immanuel. Kritik der reinen Vernunft von Immanuel Kant. 2nd ed. Riga: bei Johann Friedrich Hartknoch, 1787. [Google Scholar]
  44. Kant, Immanuel. Die Metaphysik der Sitten. Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre 1. Königsberg: bey Friedrich Nicolovius, 1798. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kennedy, Leonard A. “The Soul’s Knowledge of Itself: An Unpublished Work Attributed to St. Thomas Aquinas.” Vivarium 15, no. 1 (1977): 31–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/156853477X00022 [Google Scholar]
  46. Kerr, Gaven. “The Meaning of ‘Ens Commune’ in the Thought of Thomas Aquinas.” Yearbook of the Irish Philosophical Society, 2008, 32–60. [Google Scholar]
  47. Kneale, Martha. “Eternity and Sempiternity.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 69, no. 1 (1969): 223–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/aristotelian/69.1.223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aristotelian/69.1.223 [Google Scholar]
  48. Maritain, Jacques. The Degrees of Knowledge. Vol. 7 of The Collected Works of Jacques Maritain, edited by Ralph Mclnerny, translated by Gerald B. Phelan. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  49. Maritain, Jacques. Existence and the Existent. Translated by Lewis Galantière and Gerald B. Phelan. New York: Pantheon, 1948. [Google Scholar]
  50. Maritain, Jacques. Philosophy of Nature. Translated by Imelda C. Byrne. New York: Philosophical Library, 1951. [Google Scholar]
  51. Maurer, Armand. “Introduction.” In The Division and Method of Sciences: Questiones V and VI of his Commentary on the De Trinitate of Boethius, 4th Revised, translated and annotated, with an introduction, by Armand Maurer, VIII–XLI. Toronto: The Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  52. Mendoza, Pedro Hurtado de. “Disputationes metaphysicae, De ente transnaturali; sive abstracto a meteria.” In Disputationum in Universam Philosophiam a Summulis ad Metaphysicam, 2:282–624. Moguntiae: Typis & Sumptibus Ioannis Albini, 1619. [Google Scholar]
  53. Milidrag, Predrag. “Thomas Aquinas on the Subject of the Metaphysics.” Theoria, Beograd 59, no. 1 (2016): 42–58. https://doi.org/10.2298/theo1601037m. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/THEO1601037M [Google Scholar]
  54. Minerd, Matthew K. “Beyond Non-Being: Thomistic Metaphysics on Second Intentions, Ens morale, and Ens artificiale.” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 91, no. 3 (2017): 353–79. https://doi.org/10.5840/acpq2017523116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/acpq2017523116 [Google Scholar]
  55. Minges, Parthenius. “Suárez und Duns Scotus.” Philosophisches Jahrbuch 32 (1919): 334–40. [Google Scholar]
  56. Mitchell, Jason. “Aquinas on Esse Commune and the First Mode of Participation.” The Thomist 82 (2018): 543–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/tho.2018.0034 [Google Scholar]
  57. Modrak, Deborah K. W. “The Nous-Body Problem in Aristotle.” Review of Metaphysics 44, no. 4 (1991): 755–74. [Google Scholar]
  58. Morton, Edmund William. Doctrine of Ens Commune in St. Thomas Aquinas. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1953. [Google Scholar]
  59. Oeing-Hanhoff, Ludger. “Abstraktionsgrade.” In Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, 1:65. Basel: Schwabe, 1971. [Google Scholar]
  60. Osborne, Thomas. “The Concept as a Formal Sign.” Semiotica 2010, no. 179 (2010): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.2010.015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.2010.015 [Google Scholar]
  61. Owens, Joseph. “Aquinas as Aristotelian Commentator.” In St. Thomas Aquinas on the Existence of God: Collected Papers of Joseph Owens, C.S.R. Edited by John R. Catan, 1–19. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  62. Owens, Joseph. “Existential Act, Divine Being, and the Subject of Metaphysics.” The New Scholasticism 37 (1963): 359–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/newscholas196337321 [Google Scholar]
  63. Owens, Joseph. “Metaphysical Separation in Aquinas.” Mediaeval Studies 34 (1972): 287–306. https://doi.org/10.1484/j.ms.2.306115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/J.MS.2.306115 [Google Scholar]
  64. Plato. PLATŌNOS TIMAIOS. The Timaeus of Plato. Edited and annotated, with an introduction, by R. D. Archer-Hind. Greek and the first English edition. London: Macmillan, 1888. [Google Scholar]
  65. Plato. The Republic. Reprint. Edited by Giovanni R. F. Ferrari. Translated by Tom Griffith. Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  66. Plato. Theaetetus, Sophist. Translated by Harold North Fowler. Plato with an English Translation 2. London: William Heinemann; New York: G. P. Putnam, 1921. [Google Scholar]
  67. Poage, Nathan. “The Subject and Principles of Metaphysics in Avicenna and Aquinas.” Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 86 (2012): 231–43. https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc20128618. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc20128618 [Google Scholar]
  68. Pritzl, Kurt. “The Place of Intellect in Aristotle.” Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 80 (2006): 57–75. https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc20068015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc20068015 [Google Scholar]
  69. Reese, Philip-Neri. “Separate Substances and the Principles of Being as Being: Aquinas’s (†1274) Aporia and Flandrensis’s (†1479) Answer.” Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 31 (2020): 383–416. [Google Scholar]
  70. Renero, Adriana. “Nous and Aisthēsis: Two Cognitive Faculties in Aristotle.” Méthexis 26, no. 1 (2013): 103–20. https://doi.org/10.1163/24680974-90000616. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/24680974-90000616 [Google Scholar]
  71. Rubin, Michael J., and Elizabeth C. Shaw. “An Exposition of The Divine Names, The Book of Blessed Dionysius by Thomas Aquinas (review).” The Review of Metaphysics 77, no. 2 (2023): 345–47. https://doi.org/10.1353/rvm.2023.a915465. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/rvm.2023.a915465 [Google Scholar]
  72. Ruffinengo, Pier Paolo. “Astrazione, separazione, fondazione, della metafisica.” Annali Chieresi 2 (1986): 25–63. [Google Scholar]
  73. Sagües Iturralde, José F. “Escoto y la eficacia del Concurso divino ante Suárez.” In Scotismus decursu saeculorum. Vol. 4 of De doctrina Ioannis Duns Scoti, 339–74. Rome: Societas Internationalis Scotistica, 1968. [Google Scholar]
  74. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Commentaria in octo libros Physicorum Aristotelis. Opera omnia iussu impensaque Leonis XIII P. M. Edita 2. Rome: Ex Typographia Polyglotta S. C. de Propaganda Fide, 1884. [Google Scholar]
  75. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. In Librum Beati Dionysii De Divinis Nominibus Expositio. Edited by Ceslai Pera, Petri Caramello, and Caroli Mazzantini. Taurini: Ex Officina Libraria Marietti, 1950. [Google Scholar]
  76. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. In Metaphysicam Aristotelis Commentaria. Edited by M.-R. Cathala. Taurini: Ex Officina Libraria Marietti, 1926. [Google Scholar]
  77. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Pars prima Summae Theologiae a quaestione I ad quaestionem XLIX. Opera omnia iussu impensaque Leonis XIII P. M. Edita 4. Rome: Ex Typographia Polyglotta S. C. de Propaganda Fide, 1888. [Google Scholar]
  78. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Pars prima Summae Theologiae a quaestione L ad quaestionem CXIX. Opera omnia iussu impensaque Leonis XIII P. M. Edita 5. Rome: Ex Typographia Polyglotta S. C. de Propaganda Fide, 1889. [Google Scholar]
  79. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Pars Prima Summae Theologiae: A quaestione I ad quaestionem XLIX. Opera omnia iussu impensaque Leonis XIII P. M. Edita 4. Romae: Ex Typographia Polyglotta S. C. de Propaganda Fide, 1888. [Google Scholar]
  80. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Pars Prima Summae Theologiae: A quaestione I ad quaestionem XLIX. Opera omnia iussu impensaque Leonis XIII P. M. Edita 4. Romae: Ex Typographia Polyglotta S. C. de Propaganda Fide, 1889. [Google Scholar]
  81. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Quaestiones disputatae de potentia. Vol. 2 of Quaestiones disputatae, 10th ed., edited by Paulus M. Pession. Taurini: Ex Officina Libraria Marietti, 1965. [Google Scholar]
  82. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Quaestiones disputatae de veritate. Quaestiones 1–7. Opera omnia iussu Leonis XIII P. M. Edita, 22/1.2. Rome: Ad Sanctae Sabinae, 1970. [Google Scholar]
  83. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Quaestiones disputatae de veritate. Quaestiones 21–29. Opera omnia iussu Leonis XIII P. M. Edita, 22/3.1. Rome: Ad Sanctae Sabinae, 1973. [Google Scholar]
  84. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Scriptum super libros Sententiarum magistri Petri Lombardi. Edited by Pierre Mandonnet. Vol. 1. Parisiis: P. Lethielleux, 1929. [Google Scholar]
  85. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Sentencia Libri De Anima. Opera omnia iussu Leonis XIII P. M. Edita, 45/1. Rome: Commissio Leonina; Paris: J. Vrin, 1984. [Google Scholar]
  86. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. Summa contra Gentiles. Opera omnia iussu Leonis XIII P. M. Edita, 13–15. Rome: Apud Sedem Commissionis Leoninae; Typis Riccardi Garroni, 1918–1930. [Google Scholar]
  87. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis. “Super Boetium De Trinitate.” In Super Boetium De Trinitate: Expositio libri Boetii De ebdomadibus. Opera omnia iussu Leonis XIII P. M. Edita 50. Rome: Commissio Leonina; Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1992. Earlier edition: Sancti Thomae de Aquino, Expositio super Librum Boethii De Trinitate, ed. Bruno Decker, Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters 4 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965). [Google Scholar]
  88. Sancti Thomae de Aquino. Expositio super Librum Boethii De Trinitate. Edited by Bruno Decker. Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters 4. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004452275 [Google Scholar]
  89. Schäfer, Christian. Philosophy of Dionysius the Areopagite: An Introduction to the Structure and the Content of the Treatise On the Divine Names. Philosophia Antiqua 99. Leiden: Brill, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047409441 [Google Scholar]
  90. Seigfried, Hans. “Kant’s Thesis about Being Anticipated by Suárez?” In Proceedings of the Third International Kant Congress, edited by Lewis White Beck, 510–20. Synthese Historical Library: Texts and Studies in the History of Logic and Philosophy 4. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1972. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3099-1_51 [Google Scholar]
  91. Seligman, Paul. Being and Non-Being. An Introduction to Plato’s Sophist. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2012-1 [Google Scholar]
  92. Sgarbi, Marco. “Abraham Calov and Immanuel Kant: Aristotelian and Scholastic Traces in the Kantian Philosophy.” In “Estratto.” Historia Philosophica: An International Journal 8 (2010): 55–62. [Google Scholar]
  93. Sgarbi, Marco. “At the Origin of the Connection between Logic and Ontology. The Impact of Suárez’s Metaphysics in Köningsberg.” Anales Valentinos 36, no. 71 (2010): 145–59. [Google Scholar]
  94. Sgarbi, Marco. “The Historical Genesis of the Kantian Concept of »Transcendental«.” Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte 53 (2011): 97–117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28937/9783787336715_5 [Google Scholar]
  95. Sgarbi, Marco. Kant and Aristotle: Epistemology, Logic, and Method. New York: State University of New York Press, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781438459998 [Google Scholar]
  96. Sgarbi, Marco. La Kritik der reinen Vernunft nel contesto della tradizione logica aristotelica. Studien und Materialien Zur Geschichte der Philosophie 80. Hildesheim: G. Olms, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  97. Sgarbi, Marco. Logica e metafisica nel Kant precritico: L’ambiente intellettuale di Königsberg e la formazione della filosofia kantiana. Studien zur Philosophie des 18. Jahrhunderts 11. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  98. Sgarbi, Marco. “Metaphysics in Königsberg prior to Kant (1703–1770).” Trans/Form/Ação 33, no. 1 (2010): 31–64. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0101-317320100001000 04. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-31732010000100004 [Google Scholar]
  99. Sgarbi, Marco. “Il risveglio dal sonno dogmatico e la rivoluzione del 1772.” Archivio di storia della cultura 25 (2012): 237–49. [Google Scholar]
  100. Sgarbi, Marco. “The University of Königsberg in Transition (1689–1722): Aristotelianism and Eclecticism in Johann Jakob Rohde’s Meditatio philosophica.” Studi Kantiani 26 (2013): 125–35. [Google Scholar]
  101. Sharples, Robert W. “On Being a Tode Ti in Aristotle and Alexander.” Méthexis 12, no. 1 (March 1999): 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1163/24680974-90000324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/24680974-90000324 [Google Scholar]
  102. Sharples, Robert W. “Species, Form and Inheritance: Aristotle and After.” In Aristotle on Nature and Living Things: Philosophical and Historical Studies Presented to David M. Balme on his Seventieth Birthday, 117–28. Pittsburgh, PA: Mathesis, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  103. St. Thomas Aquinas. The Division and Method of Sciences. 4th Revised. Translated and annotated, with an introduction, by Armand Maurer. Toronto: The Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  104. St. Thomas Aquinas. An Exposition of The Divine Names, The Book of Blessed Dionysius. Edited and translated by Michael Augros. Merrimack, NH: Thomas More College Press, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  105. Stark, Conor. “Proceedings of the Second Symposium of the Dionysius Circle: ‘Participationes tripliciter considerari possunt’: The Absolute Notion of Esse in Aquinas’s Commentary on the Divine Names.” European Journal for the Study of Thomas Aquinas 42, no. 1 (2024): 98–109. https://doi.org/10.2478/ejsta-20240007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ejsta-2024-0007 [Google Scholar]
  106. Steele, Robert, ed. Summa Gramatica Magistri Rogeri Bacon necnon Sumule Dialectices Magistri Rogeri Bacon. Opera hactenus inedita Rogeri Baconi 15. Oxonii: E Typographeo Clarendoniano Londoni; Apud Humphredum Milford, 1940. [Google Scholar]
  107. Suárez, Francisco. De anima. Edited by Carolo Berton. Opera Omnia, 2–3. Parisiis: Apud Ludovicum Vivès, Bibiopolam editorem, 1851. [Google Scholar]
  108. Suárez, Francisco. Disputationes metaphysicae. Editio nova. Edited by Carolo Berton. Vol. 25–26. Opera Omnia. Parisiis: Apud Ludovicum Vivès, Bibiopolam editorem, 1866. [Google Scholar]
  109. Taylor, Richard C. “Remarks on Cogitatio in Averroes’ Commentarium Magnum in Aristotelis de Anima Libros.” In Averroes and the Aristotelian Tradition: Sources, Constitution and Reception of the Philosophy of Ibn Rushd (1126–1198). Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium Averroicum (Cologne, 1996), edited by Jan Aertsen and Gerhard Endress, 217–55. Islamic Philosophy, Theology and Science. Texts and Studies 31. Leiden: Brill, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004452756_013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004452756_013 [Google Scholar]
  110. Tedesco, Federico. “Può l’ente logico essere definito un artefatto mentale (e la disciplina che se ne occupa una tecnica scientifica)? La natura analogica e i limiti epistemici del modello demiurgico di matrice tomista.” In La dinamica della ricerca: Mozioni et rimozioni nella scienza, edited by Luca S. Maugeri, 53–78. Bologna: Pardes Edizioni, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  111. Thomas Aquinas. Commentary on the Metaphysics of Aristotle. Translated by John P. Rowan. Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1961. [Google Scholar]
  112. Thomas de Vio, Caietani. In De ente et essentia D. Thomae Aquinatis Commentaria. Edited by Marie-Hyacinthe Laurent. Taurini: Marietti, 1934. [Google Scholar]
  113. Velde, Rudi te. Aquinas on God. The ‘Divine Science’ of the Summa Theologiae. Ashgate Studies in the History of Philosophical Theology. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  114. Walker, Adrian J. “Personal Singularity and The Communio Personarum: A Creative Development of Thomas Aquinas’ Doctrine of Esse Commune.” Communio: International Catholic Review 31 (2024): 457–79. [Google Scholar]
  115. Wippel, John F. “Essence and Existence.” In The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy: From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Disintegration of Scholasticism, 1100–1600, edited by Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, Jan Pinborg, and Eleonore Stump, 385–410. Cambridge University Press, 1982. https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521226059.022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521226059.022 [Google Scholar]
  116. Wippel, John F. The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas: From Finite Being to Uncreated Being. Monographs of the Society for Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy 1. ¬Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  117. Wippel, John F. “Metaphysics and ‘Separatio’ According to Thomas Aquinas.” The Review of Metaphysics 31, no. 3 (1978): 431–70. [Google Scholar]
  118. Wippel, John F. “Thomas Aquinas and Siger of Brabant on Being and the Science of Being as Being.” The Modern Schoolman 82, no. 2 (2005): 143–68. https://doi.org/10.5840/schoolman200582216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/schoolman200582216 [Google Scholar]
  119. Wippel, John F. “Thomas Aquinas and Participation.” In Studies in Medieval Philosophy, edited by John F. Wippel, 117–58. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1987. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv176b6.9 [Google Scholar]
  120. Wippel, John F. “The Title ‘First Philosophy’ According to Thomas Aquinas and His Different Justifications for the Same.” The Review of Metaphysics 27, no. 3 (1974): 585–600. [Google Scholar]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.