Augustine’s “Illumination” Theory: Correcting Bonaventure and Gilson via Plotinus and Marius Victorinus

In Douglas Hedley & Daniel J. Tolan, Participation in the divine: a philosophical history, from antiquity to the modern era. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. pp. 128-161 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This chapter shows that Augustine’s “divine illumination theory of knowledge” is merely his belief that the human mind is capable of intellectual cognition because it naturally “participates” in the Divine Mind, as its image. Consequently, Bonaventure's and Gilson's claim that Augustine thought the human mind must be enlightened by special divine assistance in ordinary (non-mystical) intellectual cognition is erroneous. That is true of the whole of Augustine's writing career: earlier works such as On the Teacher and the Confessions agree with his presentation in On the Trinity 12. This resolution of a long-standing debate about how to interpret Augustine becomes possible when we pay careful attention to the ancient philosophical problems “illumination” is meant to resolve, and when we use Plotinus and the early Christian Neoplatonist Marius Victorinus to interpret his vocabulary and claims. The recovery of this late antique context greatly clarifies Augustine’s epistemological theory and reveals its explanatory power. For the Plotinian basis of the account is a synthesis of Aristotelian and Platonic elements that can explain why our minds are uniquely suited to abstracting intelligibility from sensory data, and how they do so.

Author's Profile

Analytics

Added to PP
2025-02-18

Downloads
111 (#99,826)

6 months
111 (#54,456)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?