Skip to main content

Posts

Objective vs. Subjective Rights Suárez played a critical transitional role in redefining ius (right) as a facultas moralis—a subjective moral power or faculty inherently possessed by individuals. [1] Objective Moral Order: In traditional Aristotelian and Thomistic thought, right (ius) primarily referred to the just thing itself within an objective, divinely ordained cosmos. Justice was about giving everyone their proper, cosmic due. Subjective Moral Powers: Suárez shifted the focus inward. He argued that individuals possess innate "moral powers" or capabilities that are tied to their wills and rational nature. This subjectivist understanding of rights provided an indispensable stepping stone for later Enlightenment liberals. The Divine Anchor: Unlike later secular contractarians, Suárez insisted that these subjective moral powers were inseparable from the objective moral order and God-given human nature. Human nature is universally oriented toward the good, and natural law is required to guide rational creatures toward flourishing. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Francisco Suárez revolutionized early modern political theory by framing individuals as fundamentally free and equal under God , a concept known as sui iuris (acting under one's own authority). By arguing that no one is born with natural jurisdiction over another, he established the necessity of popular consent and a social pact to form legitimate political communities. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ] Francisco Suárez vs. John Locke: The "Bridge" and the Divide While Suárez laid the structural groundwork that thinkers like John Locke would later adapt to build their own social contract theories, their philosophical frameworks differ significantly. [ 1 , 2 ] Areas of Alignment Natural Liberty & Equality: Both philosophers begin with the premise that humans are born equal and free from the natural rule of others. Consent of the Governed: Both assert that legitimate political jurisdiction cannot exist by nature; it must be created through an act of voluntary consent and mutual ...
Post a Comment
Read more
Recent posts

Fernando Play

Fernando Play Venue :   Theater at Catholic High School or University. Curtain opens.   NARRATOR addresses theater audience. NARRATOR:   Understand we have students from Social Studies and Religion classes in the audience today.  NARRATOR:   Good.  Then I shall begin with a question?  In the reconquest of Spain.  Can you name the person or persons who drove the Moors out of Spain. AUDIENCE:  Chorus - Ferdinand & Isabella, 1492.  Any more questions. (Laughter) NARRATOR:  True. , but only one Kingdom--Granada.  Who drove the Moors out of the vast majority of Spain 200 years before Ferdinand & Isabella?  Who recaptured almost all of Spain and  several major cities including the 2 most important supposedly unconquerable Moorish strongholds Cordoba  and Seville?  If you don't know, that's OK. Very few students or even teachers do. His name was Fernado, a youth of 18 years of age. He would be kno...
Post a Comment
Read more

The philosophical debate ties together John Rist’s cultural critique, the historical roots of human rights, Duns Scotus's theology, and Edith Stein’s phenomenology.The Core Thesis: In Confusion in the West, John Rist argues that modern Western thought went astray by divorcing objective morality from divine commands, leading to a flawed reliance on "subjective rights" (rights possessed by individuals rather than duties owed to God).The Scotist Shift: Rist traces the confusion back to the Middle Ages. He examines how Franciscan theologian John Duns Scotus shifted focus from God’s nature/goodness to God’s absolute, unbridled will. This voluntarist turn paved the way for modern subjective rights, where human will takes precedence over universal objective order.

The philosophical debate ties together John Rist’s cultural critique, the historical roots of human rights, Duns Scotus's theology, and Edith Stein’s phenomenology . [ 1 , 2 ] The Core Thesis: In Confusion in the West , John Rist argues that modern Western thought went astray by divorcing objective morality from divine commands, leading to a flawed reliance on "subjective rights" (rights possessed by individuals rather than duties owed to God). The Scotist Shift: Rist traces the confusion back to the Middle Ages. He examines how Franciscan theologian John Duns Scotus shifted focus from God’s nature/goodness to God’s absolute, unbridled will . This voluntarist turn paved the way for modern subjective rights, where human will takes precedence over universal objective order.
Post a Comment
Read more

AI Overview In their book Confusion in the West, John and Anna Rist explore how the phenomenologist Edith Stein drew on John Duns Scotus to frame the foundational uniqueness of the human person. The "Scotist principle" highlights that every human possesses an individual, unrepeatable core rather than just being a generic instance of a species.John Rist's discussion points center on the philosophical roots of individuality and modern societal breakdowns. The key connecting principles and figures include:The "Original Tradition": The Rists argue that Western civilization is in crisis because it has eroded its foundational "original tradition" (which combines classical philosophy and early Christian theology), leading to nihilism and consumerism.Duns Scotus on Individuality: Medieval scholastic philosopher John Duns Scotus argued against Thomas Aquinas by asserting that human uniqueness stems from a specific metaphysical essence (the haecceitas, or "thisness"). Scotus affirmed that humans are individuals in their own right, not just variations of a natural category.Stein’s Application: In her magnum opus Finite and Eternal Being, Edith Stein utilized this Scotist concept. From the "Scotist principle," she concluded that the most vital and fundamental distinction among humans is their unrepeatable personal core, providing a philosophical bedrock for human dignity that does not rely on biological reductionism.Read more about Edith Stein's phenomenological anthropology and Scotist influences via Church Life Journal or explore John Rist's arguments further on Cambridge Core.

AI Overview In their book Confusion in the West , John and Anna Rist explore how the phenomenologist Edith Stein drew on John Duns Scotus to frame the foundational uniqueness of the human person. The "Scotist principle" highlights that every human possesses an individual, unrepeatable core rather than just being a generic instance of a species. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ] John Rist's discussion points center on the philosophical roots of individuality and modern societal breakdowns. The key connecting principles and figures include: [ 1 ] The "Original Tradition": The Rists argue that Western civilization is in crisis because it has eroded its foundational "original tradition" (which combines classical philosophy and early Christian theology), leading to nihilism and consumerism. Duns Scotus on Individuality: Medieval scholastic philosopher John Duns Scotus argued against Thomas Aquinas by asserting that human uniqueness stems from a specific meta...
Post a Comment
Read more