History of Philosophy Workshop: Dominic LaMantia and Johnny Waldrop, "Thomistic Models of the Virtual Distinction"

Please join us as we continue our lunchtime history of philosophy workshops! Each meeting will consist of a presentation by a graduate student or faculty on a project that they are working on in the history of philosophy, followed by a period of comments/questions from the other participants. The workshop is designed to give grad students and faculty the opportunity to develop ideas and receive helpful feedback on projects/papers in a friendly and low stakes environment. 

This week's co-presenters are philosophy PhD students Dominic LaMantia and Johnny Waldrop. They will be presenting on "Thomistic Models of the Virtual Distinction."

Abstract: In the late 13^th century, Scotus raised an argument for the formal distinction based on Trinitarian doctrine which came to be known as the Scotistic Achilles.  Paternity, by divine simplicity, is identical to the divine essence.  But, prior to any act of the intellect, the essence is communicable and paternity is not.  But if, prior to any act of the intellect, the essence is communicable and paternity is not, then there must be a distinction ex natura rei between them.  So the formal distinction, which is an ex natura rei distinction between identicals, is necessary for making sense of the Trinity.  From at least the early 14th century through the 20th, Thomists (and others) have asserted that the virtual distinction is sufficient to answer the Achilles.  However, they themselves disagree about how the virtual distinction is actually supposed to solve the worry.  In this paper, we sample some important Thomists (such as Cajetan, Banez, John of St. Thomas, and others) and argue that there are at least four different strategies the Thomists use to respond to the Achilles, all under the banner of the virtual distinction: denying that paternity is incommunicable prior to any act of the intellect, utilizing reduplication, adopting dialetheism, and adopting a mysterian solution.  We defend our interpretation of these authors, and conclude that none of the proffered solutions are promising—if the Thomists are right, their Paris is yet to be found.

Lunch is provided with sign-up! For more information, please email Dylan MacFarlane. We hope to see you there!

Originally published at historyofphilosophy.nd.edu. Please check their event page for details, since this event section may not reflect any changes to the event.