It has been a while since I made a “top four” post. Here are the four most popular articles of 2021, in case you missed them the first time around. I will continue our study of democracy soon. Enjoy!
The Fantastic Four
Aristotle and Augustine on Being, Truth, and Logic: Part Two
Note: The first part of the series can be found here. In that post, we explored some possible overlap between Aristotle and Augustine and the nature of being. In this post, we will continue the conversation as it relates to being and truth.
The first theme one comes to is the relationship between truth and being—an examination of the connection between what is, with what is true1. Aristotle and Augustine ground the truth of things in being, or reality. For example, Aristotle in his Metaphysics makes the connection between that which is and that which is true:
It is right also that philosophy should be called knowledge of the truth. For the end of theoretical knowledge is truth, while that of practical knowledge is action (for even if they consider how things are, practical men do not study the eternal, but what is relative and in the present). Now we do not know a truth without its cause; and a thing has a quality in a higher degree than other things if in virtue of it the similar quality belongs to the other things as well (e.g. fire is the hottest of things; for it is the cause of the heat of all other things); so that that which causes derivative truths to be true is most true. Hence the principles of eternal things must be always most true (for they are not merely sometimes true, nor is there any cause of their being, but they themselves are the cause of the being of other things), so that as each thing is in respect of being, so is it in respect of truth. (512)
Aristotle believes there is a universal and transcendent quality to truth and many different things can participate in truth or be called true. Aristotle indicates that universal things, like being or truth, are in some sense eternal, or transcendent, because they are what particular things, which are temporal and always changing, participate in. If there is something that demonstrates truth, there must be a higher source which is the cause of that truth, because Aristotle is interested in investigating the primary causes of things. Similarly, in prayer-like fashion to God, Augustine writes in his Confessions:
I looked at other things too and saw that they owe their being to you. I saw that all finite things are in you, not as though you were a place that contained them, but in a different manner. They are in you because you hold all things in your truth as though they were in your hand, and all things are true in so far as they have being. Falsehood is nothing but the supposed existence of something which has no being. (63, Emphasis added)
At least two things are important in these passages. First, each thinker holds that the being of things are true in as much as they correspond to reality. And second, it is the eternal or transcendent things which provide the foundation for the things of this world. What is it these philosophers are trying to explain? One of the central concerns for the metaphysician is to get the terms “is” and “is not” correct. If one does not get the nature of reality right, she runs the risk of getting everything else about it wrong. Augustine reminds readers that things are true in so far as they have being, and false if they have no being. And Aristotle makes a similar claim when he says that as each thing is in respect of being, so is it in respect to truth. Aristotle puts a finer point on this concept when he says, “Again, ‘being’ and ‘is’ mean that a statement is true, ‘not being’ that it is not true but false” (538). Augustine and Aristotle are telling readers that a thing (or perhaps concept) must correspond to reality in order to be considered true. If something has no being or actuality in reality, it is not true. (For Aristotle, that which is “act” or “in act” is that which has existence or participates in existence.) This is simply a restatement of the correspondence theory of truth—truth is that which corresponds to reality. Truth is grounded in being or reality. Each thinker agrees with this. But do they have good reasons that support this position? Aristotle and Augustine would point to the laws of logic for support.
Aristotle and Augustine believe the basic laws of logic reflect the nature of reality (or being). The foundational laws of logic are generally considered to be the law of noncontradiction (nothing can both be, and not be at the same time and same way), the law of identity (a thing is what it is, a true proposition is true), and the law of excluded middle (something either is or is not, with nothing in between; a proposition is either true or false). The correspondence theory of truth depends on the laws of logic because they are basic properties of being. In addition, the laws of logic are considered among the first principles of being because all other laws and principles follow from them. The law of excluded middle and the law of identity follow from the law of noncontradiction. The law of noncontradiction holds primacy because it is a judgment between being and nonbeing, which is one of contradiction because one must first discern whether something is or is not. Augustine restates the law of noncontradiction and places it as the first principle of logic when he says, “For nonentity is contrary of that which is” (397). A judgment between compatibility or contradiction must first be made between what is and what is not. Speaking about the law of noncontradiction, Aristotle says that it is “naturally the starting-point even for all the other axioms” (525). Identity and excluded middle logically follow.
Next time, well look at another way the law of noncontradiction has primacy and Augustine’s use of it.
1A full conversation about the nature and metaphysics of truth is beyond the scope of this essay. Here, the primary focus is on descriptive truth—truth as an agreement between human cognition and external reality.
Works Cited
Aristotle. The Works of Aristotle: 1. Great Books of the Western World. Vol. 7. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1999.
Augustine. The Confessions, The City of God, On Christian Doctrine. Great Books of the Western World. Vol. 16. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1999.
Aristotle and Augustine on Being, Truth, and Logic: Part One
It is right also that philosophy should be called knowledge of the truth.–Aristotle
If truth is genuinely true, then it will be discovered regardless of one’s philosophical outlook or frame of reference. For example, Aristotle and Augustine have both discovered important metaphysical connections between the perennial questions of truth, reality or being, and the metaphysical principles that make being a possibility in the first place. Although it might be unusual to find connections between Aristotle and Augustine, due to their different methods and perspectives, it should not be surprising that they arrive at similar conclusions. Even though each thinker has a different metaphysical starting point and prior commitments (Augustine being a Platonist, and Aristotle utilizing a more empirical and inductive approach) there is still a lot of common ground between the two philosophers. As I will demonstrate, there are several reasons for this shared commonality. Each thinker has a commitment to discover truth and believes real knowledge about the world and ultimate reality is possible. Since reality, itself, is the determinant of order (not one’s theories about it, because those could be wrong), it should not be surprising that each thinker arrives at similar conclusions even if each is employing different approaches.1 The structure of reality is not different for either philosopher. Even though each thinker is working in different historical eras and regions of the world, truth still endures across time and space. In addition, it may be discovered that each philosopher’s approach, though different, is actually complementary to one another. For this essay, the specific overlapping areas between these thinkers are the themes of being, truth, and the role of logic as foundational to understanding reality. Hopefully, it will be discovered how these great ideas and intuitions of being, truth, and logic must be among the first principles of reality.
First, it is important to have a working definition of being before making an analysis of each philosopher’s position. Being is the object of study of metaphysics (the branch of philosophy which investigates the first principles and causes of all reality). Being is simply that to which existence belongs, and it is the task of the metaphysician to describe the causes, principles, and limitations which belong to different kinds of things. It is believed that understanding the modes and properties of being through the philosophical lenses of being and becoming, or being and non-being, that a greater apprehension of reality is achieved. Being is the exploration of reality, although, it may include more than physical reality because the metaphysician is also interested in how immaterial things like mathematics (including the axioms and laws of logic such as noncontradiction, identity, and excluded middle), the mind or intellect (or at least, objects of the mind), and moral truths such as justice, the good, or the concepts of right and wrong, relate to being. Metaphysicians explore the question, “Is there an ultimate foundation to these things that make them possible?” Therefore, when Aristotle, Augustine, or any other classical metaphysician discusses themes such as being and truth, or logic, they are investigating the first principles of reality and how they relate to the world around us.2
It is important to point out as Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas do, that there is a transcendent and universal quality to being. Briefly, these philosophers believe there is a transcendent nature to being because it is a universal concept just like truth, goodness, justice, and human nature (among others) are. These concepts are considered transcendent and universal because any number of particular things can participate in them. For example, many particular people can pursue justice and even experience instances of it. To the degree that a particular instance of justice is genuine, it resembles or takes part in the universal and transcendent definition of what it means to achieve justice which is true at all times and places. This is why an historian can say that a particular event in the past is just or unjust3. Similarly, when Aristotle says, “being is predicated of all things” (588), he is saying that being is a universally transcendent concept. Just like truth, justice, and the good, being must be transcendent and universal in order to make any meaningful statements about it.
We now have a reasonable understanding of what being is and why it is considered a universal. In part two we will examine the relationship between being and truth and explore important commonalities between the perspectives of Aristotle and Augustine.
1Reality, here, is used to indicate that which exists outside the human mind. In this sense, reality is the determinate of order because sometimes there is a real difference between appearance and reality, just as there is a difference between our theories of reality (epistemology) and reality itself (ontology). Moving on in this essay, however, the term “being” will be used to include all of reality which can be divided along the lines of subjective and objective, mental and external, actual and possible, and so forth.
2Although there were those before him who touched on the question, Aristotle posed the question of being this way, “And indeed the question which was raised of old and is raised now and always, and is always the subject of doubt, viz. What being is, is just the question, what is substance” (Vol. 7, 550). In this passage, some translations describe “substance” as “beingness” which might be more helpful. Substance, of course, for Aristotle was a combination of form, or essence, and matter (essence being the limiting factor of matter). Nonetheless, the question of being is a perennial one.
3Here, it is claimed that although the past no longer exists, it is a real object of study and perceptual thought and, therefore, has reality. That is, it has being and is related to being even though it is no longer in act or has actual existence. Humans are cognitively wired in some way to discern the past. Moral truths apply to history because of their transcendent nature.
Review: An Introduction to Philosophy, Daniel Sullivan
Daniel Sullivan. An Introduction to Philosophy: Perennial Principles of the Classical Realist Tradition. TAN Books, 2009. (Paperback ISBN:0895554690); $18.89
Our most commonplace expressions of optimism or pessimism, selfishness or high-mindedness, idealism or cynicism, carry along with them unacknowledged assumptions about the nature of the universe as a whole and man’s place in it—Daniel Sullivan
Over the years, one of the best introductions to the field of philosophy, and a text that I have found to be among the most useful is Daniel Sullivan’s An Introduction to Philosophy: Perennial Principles of the Classical Realist Tradition. Daniel Sullivan was one of the great translators of Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica.
Since one of the themes of this blog is the importance of realism and why its recovery is necessary for the flourishing of Western civilization, I thought a review of this introductory textbook is in order. First, a quick note about realism since Sullivan seeks to explain the big questions of philosophy from the standpoint of classical realism. Realism is the metaphysical doctrine that Forms, or essences, possess objective reality. In modern philosophy, realism is the concept (contrasted with idealism) that physical objects exist independently of perception, the mind, or theory of reality. For realists, theories of reality are logically separate from objective reality itself (that is, epistemological theories do not determine reality). The name itself was given to a certain philosophic way of thought first inaugurated by Plato and Aristotle, developed and refined in the Middle Ages, and still living at the present time. This view includes three basic theses: 1. The world is made up of substantial beings really related to one another, which exist independently of any human opinions or desires. 2. These substances and relations can be known by the human mind as they are in themselves. 3. Such knowledge can offer sound and immutable guidance (the law of nature) for individual and social action. Regarding the overall approach of a realist philosophy, Sullivan explains, “If you wish to emphasize the rock-solid foundation of our philosophy in the nature of things as they are, you can call it the Realist philosophy. Stressing the collective labor which has gone into its elaboration over the centuries, it may be termed the Common philosophy. Or, since metaphysics is the archstone of our philosophy, we can call it the philosophy of being” (279). Sullivan seeks to apply the classical realist tradition of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, and their best modern interpreters to the perennial questions of our day.
Originally published in 1957, TAN Books republished this textbook in 1992 and 2009. It is still in publication at the time of this writing. The endurance of this book speaks to the timeless questions of philosophy and the human condition. For the intellectually honest, the big questions of life never really go away, and Sullivan’s text brings wisdom, clarity, and insight. Sullivan does a great job with teaching one how to think carefully and rationally about such timeless questions as the nature of mankind, the way we know things, the life of virtue, the road to happiness, and the wonder of being or reality itself. The writing is clear, easy to understand, and is free of needless jargon and system building. Sullivan clearly explicates the great questions of life through an understanding of intellectual history (the development of ideas that impact society and culture) and a solid demonstration of the problems themselves. Mortimer Adler once said that “unless the philosopher solves problems by laying adequate analytical foundations for demonstration and, in the light thereof, by proving conclusions from self-evident premises, he does nothing” (189). In this text, Sullivan does just that. He does an excellent job of presenting and defending some of the great issues which impact everyone in some way, both through a historical analysis of the development of these ideas and a logical examination of them. His book is very accessible to non-philosophers and educated laypeople alike.
The book itself is divided into five sections. After explaining the inevitability of philosophy, because everyone, when pressed, has some ideas regarding the ultimate concerns of life, Sullivan lays out his text to address the historical rise of philosophy, the meaning of man, the making of man, the universe of man, and the universe of being. While these might sound like dated or abstract descriptors, Sullivan is really seeking to explain what it means to be human and have a particular nature (the meaning of man), what it takes for humans to flourish (the making of man), and the world in which we live in, the world of bodies and nature (the universe of man), and the realm of being which cannot be denied and has been a perennial source of wonder since man first began to philosophize. This is the world of metaphysics, the quest to understand the ultimate first causes of all reality both material and immaterial. The first philosophers in the historical record were, in fact, metaphysicians because they tried to understand all of reality, including such great questions as the intellectual nature of mankind, the nature of good, what it means to live a good life, and the source and cause of justice, mathematics, change and permanence, and the first principles which make these possible—and, finally, the ultimate question, why is there something rather than nothing? In short, Sullivan carefully helps one to understand that metaphysics—the philosophy of being—seeks to understand these ultimate “why” questions.
Sullivan, however, doe not do this in an overly technical way. When discussing the nature of man and the nature of knowledge, or how we know things, the author helps us to understand the unique gift of reason that everyone has. Besides being an animal, mankind has a power—the power of reason which in itself makes him different in kind from the rest of the animals. Reason, therefore, is the defining characteristic of human beings. We can choose whether or not we want to use our reason, and how we use it, but reason cannot be denied. Human flourishing requires us to use our reason well. After all, human beings are the only species that can reflect on their own thoughts and discover principles of truth and reality. Sullivan reminds us that human beings are not primarily material things. “In short, man is a being altogether unique as compared with the rest of the physical universe, because in knowing and judging he rises above the inexorable law and rigidity of the realm of matter” (64). Sullivan helpfully provides the metaphysical foundations for what it means to be human.
These great ideas of classical realism, the nature of man, and the ultimate metaphysical questions which have always been part of the enduring human quest are helpfully illuminated by Sullivan’s text. Although an introduction, it provides a solid foundation for further exploration. If one is interested in gaining wisdom and insight into the timeless conversations of what it means to exist as human beings and the ultimate nature of reality, this is a great book to start with.
Works Cited
Adler, Mortimer J. “The Demonstration of God’s Existence.” The Thomist, 1943, pp. 188 – 218.
Sullivan, Daniel J. An Introduction to Philosophy: Perennial Principles of the Classical Realist Tradition. TAN Books, 2009.
Recent Comments