2005/10/01 by Thomas Williams · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · #Medieval Philosophy and Theology #Theology and Philosophy of Evil #Karl Barth and Christian Theology #Doctrine #Philosophy #Epistemology #Theology
paper · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0025.2005.00298.x
openalex publication_date 2005/10/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/22
After clearing up some misunderstandings of Scotus’s doctrine of univocity, I argue that the doctrine of univocity is true. All predications about God must be reducible to univocity if they are to be intelligible at all. So even if the doctrine has unwelcome consequences, we ought to affirm it anyway; it is not the job of the theologian or philosopher to shrink from uncomfortable truths. I then argue that the doctrine of univocity in fact has no unwelcome consequences. Moreover, it has at least two salutary logical consequences of the highest importance. I conclude that the polemic against univocity, and against Scotus as its defender, is misplaced.