In the times preceding the emergence of Neo-Platonism, the philosophers now known as Middle Platonists elaborated an extensive reflection on the possibility of knowing God, and the ways that could lead to acquiring knowledge about the transcendent. According to Plato, “To discover the Maker and Father of this Universe were a task indeed; and having discovered Him, to declare Him unto all men were a thing impossible” ​​. The Middle Platonists believed that God, whom they sometimes identified with the Platonic (...) One and Good, is possible to know but not possible to express. Even though the knowledge of God is accompanied by all the difficulties associated with the process of intellectual and ethical improvement, and although what one comes to know in this process is ultimately impossible to express in human language, gaining knowledge of God and becoming like Him is nevertheless the goal of all Platonic philosophy. Jewish and Christian thinkers working at this time came to similar conclusions. These include Philo of Alexandria, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen, who are themselves sometimes deemed Middle-Platonic philosophers. Unlike their pagan colleagues, they believed that man’s process of coming to know God would go on forever. They thought that the finite human mind would never be able to contain the infinite, and they held that the essence and power of God are indeed infinite. The goal of this article is to expose the relationship between the infinity and the unknowability of God, and at the same time to point out the differences in the theses put forward on this question by pagan Middle Platonists and those who accepted Judeo-Christian revelation. (shrink)

Tekst ma na celu bliższe zapoznanie Czytelnika z otwierającą cykl Aristotelica pracą doktorską Franza Brentano Von der mannigfachen Bedeutung des Seienden nach Aristoteles (1862), która znana jest głównie z tego, że miała zainspirować młodego Martina Heideggera i sprawić, że zajął się filozofią. Tekst bada naturę i siłę tej inspiracji. Część pierwsza opowiada historię powstania Von der mannigfachen … oraz przedstawia szerszy kontekst zetknięcia się Heideggera z filozofią Brentana, a także stara się przedstawić Heideggera na tle jego pozostałych uczniów (Kazimierz Twardowski, (...) Edmund Husserl, Alexius Meinong, Carl Stumpf, Anton Marty, et al.). Część druga omawia piętnaście tez o bycie, które stanowią sedno dzieła O wielorakim znaczeniu bytu u Arystotelesa i tym samym umożliwia porównanie tomistycznej w duchu ontologii Brentana z ontologią fundamentalną Heideggera, o czym traktuje część trzecia. Część trzecia stara się również zweryfikować faktyczną wysokość „długu”, jaki Heidegger miał u Brentana zaciągnąć i odpowiedzieć na pytanie, do jakiego stopnia, o ile w ogóle, Martina Heideggera możemy nazwać „brentanistą”. (shrink)

The article analyzes the theory of philosophy of nature presented by Piotr Chojnacki. This concept was an important component of the Leuven (neo)Thomism, developed also in the Polish Thomistic philosophical milieu, which since the beginning of the 20th century has been in crisis. I argue that the cause of this crisis was the eclectic nature of the Leuven Thomism as it was developed by Piotr Chojnacki. Although in contemporary philosophy eclecticism is being rehabilitated, due to the dominant scientism and naturalism, (...) the prospects for the development of the philosophy of nature inspired by the program of Leuven Thomism seem to be very limited. (shrink)