Skip to main content

AI Overview The key difference between Duns Scotus and St. Augustine on freedom of the will is how they relate the will to the intellect. While Augustine viewed the will's freedom as ultimately tied to and enabled by right reason, Scotus insisted that the will is fundamentally a power of self-determination that can even act contrary to the intellect's judgment.

AI Overview
The key difference between Duns Scotus and St. Augustine on freedom of the will is how they relate the will to the intellect
. While Augustine viewed the will's freedom as ultimately tied to and enabled by right reason, Scotus insisted that the will is fundamentally a power of self-determination that can even act contrary to the intellect's judgment. 
St. Augustine: Freedom enabled by right reason
For Augustine, true freedom lies in willingly choosing the good, and the will is fundamentally guided by reason. 
  • The will is fallen, but remains free: In its original, uncorrupted state, the will was perfectly free and could choose not to sin. After the Fall, the will became corrupted by sin, but retains its free choice (liberum arbitrium). However, for the unredeemed, this choice is so enslaved to sin that they can only choose to sin, not to act righteously.
  • Grace and predestination: Augustine argued that for the elect, God's grace enables the will to freely choose the good, aligning with God's will. The fact that God foreknows a free act does not determine it, since God exists outside of time.
  • No will to evil: For Augustine, evil is a privation of good, not a substance in itself. The will is turned away from a higher good towards a lower one. The capacity to turn away from God is part of the will's nature, but this is a perversity of the will, not an intrinsic part of its freedom. 
Duns Scotus: The primacy of the will
Scotus championed a radical version of "voluntarism," emphasizing the will as a spontaneous and independent faculty, even from the intellect's guidance. 
  • Will over intellect: In contrast to rationalist views (like that of Thomas Aquinas, who was influenced by Augustine), Scotus held that the will is not simply a rational appetite that follows the intellect's judgment. The will can act independently and even oppose what the intellect judges to be the best course of action.
  • Freedom as a "power for opposites": A central feature of Scotus's view is the will's innate "power for opposites" or potentia ad opposita. This means that at the very instant an agent chooses to act, they simultaneously have the power not to act or to choose an alternative, regardless of what the intellect presents as the best option. This applies to both human and divine will.
  • The two affections of the will: Scotus distinguished between two "affections" within the will:
    • Affectio commodi (affection for the advantageous): A natural inclination toward one's own happiness and self-interest. This is an innate desire, but it does not determine the will's choice.
    • Affectio iustitiae (affection for justice): The will's innate capacity for freedom, which allows it to moderate the desire for one's own advantage for the sake of justice or a higher good. This affection allows the will to choose a lesser good or even to love God for God's own sake, rather than for personal reward. 
Summary of key differences
Aspect St. AugustineDuns Scotus
Primary focusThe will's freedom is directed by the rational intellect and enabled by God's grace.The will is a distinct and spontaneous power of self-determination, independent of the intellect's judgment.
Intellect-Will relationshipA form of "intellectualism": The will is a rational appetite that follows what the intellect judges to be good. True freedom is found in choosing rightly."Voluntarism": The will has primacy over the intellect. The intellect presents options, but the will is free to choose among them, or not, according to its own power.
Freedom's essenceFreedom is the capacity to choose the good, or to act according to one's nature (whether fallen or redeemed).Freedom is fundamentally the "power for opposites," or the ability to choose otherwise at any given moment.
SinA misuse of the will's freedom, a perversity of the will turning away from the highest good (God) toward lower things.The result of the will freely choosing to act according to the affectio commodi (one's own advantage) rather than the affectio iustitiae (justice).
Dive deeper in AI Mode

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Vox Cantoris vs. Aqua

The Catholic Monitor commenter Aqua had this to say to the Vox Cantoris website: Aqua said… Fred, your topic here reminds me of a dust-up, a few days ago, on Vox Cantoris. He asserted that it is our duty as Christians to wear masks to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass if the government tells us we must, or they will close our Churches. My response to him was that I find it inconceivable that an orthodox Catholic, such as himself, would ever submit to unjust dictates from secular government over how we approach Our Lord in Holy Mass. My response to him was that the Mass belongs to Catholics and we decide, within the bounds of Tradition, and in accord with the Word of Jesus, how we conduct ourselves in Holy Mass. Only one authority prevails over Mass and that is our God and the Sacred Tradition given by Him to guide us in all times and places. Understand, there is nothing inherently wrong with wearing a mask to Mass. But there is EVERYTHING wrong with wearing a symbol...
9 comments
Read more

Might Biden be a Liar & Predator like McCarrick?

September 15, 2020   Everyone knows that sexual predator ex-cardinal Theodore McCarrick is a liar. His whole life was a lie of betrayal of the most sacred vows he took and the violation of the moral tenets of the Catholic faith which he desecrated. Most people don't realize that part of this desecration of lies included lying for "gravely sinful" Democrats like Joe Biden. McCarrick protected Biden when then head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later to be Pope Benedict XVI) wrote that bishops were not to admit to Communion politicians like "gravely sinful" Biden who supports the killing of unborn babies. McCarrick lied for politicians like Biden by ignoring the important parts of the Ratzinger letter and told bishops not to ignore the Catholic Church law.  Last year, Fr. Robert Morey denied Holy Communion to the “gravely sinful” Biden following a "2004 decree signed jointly by the bishops of ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Scientific Realism and Antirealism

Scientific Realism and Antirealism Debates about scientific realism concern the extent to which we are entitled to hope or believe that science will tell us what the world is really like. Realists tend to be optimistic; antirealists do not. To a first approximation, scientific realism is the view that well-confirmed scientific theories are approximately true; the entities they postulate do exist; and we have good reason to believe their main tenets. Realists often add that, given the spectacular predictive, engineering, and theoretical successes of our best scientific theories, it would be miraculous were they not to be approximately correct. This natural line of thought has an honorable pedigree yet has been subject to philosophical dispute since modern science began. In the 1970s, a particularly strong form of scientific realism was advocated by Putnam, Boyd, and others. When scientific realism is mentioned in the literature, usually some version of this is intended. It is often char...
Post a Comment
Read more