Filosofía

In this paper, I try to show how the intellect and the reality go together by a metaphysical analysis of the intellectual potency. According to the classical think, there is a true ‘idealist’ way to considerate the intellect. In the divine intellect there is —ontologically— all being that is present —logically— in God’s mind.

Reseña de Luis-Fernando Valdés, 'Scripta Theologica' 43 (2011), p. 490:
"David Torrijos Castrillejo, 'Más allá de Aristóteles: un análisis metafísico del entendimiento', pp. 343-364. Torrijos Castrillejo aporta un artículo que versa sobre las implicaciones ontológicas del conocimiento divino, según Aristóteles. El Autor asume (siguiendo a Tomás de Aquino) como verdadera la afirmación aristotélica sobre la naturaleza del Motor Inmóvil, según la cual la esencia de éste se identifica con su propio pensamiento, y de este modo trata de mostrar dos implicaciones que afectan al ser: a) El entendimiento divino no conoce, originariamente, nada distinto de sí, de tal suerte que el acto de conocer no se distingue de su propia naturaleza (p. 358); b) En tanto que el ser en su estado más perfecto (el ser de Dios, a saber) es primordialmente cognoscitivo, el acto de ser no es principalmente algo fáctico, sino autoconsciente, al menos en su origen (p. 359)."

Estas páginas pretenden llevar a cabo una comprensión del pensamiento de Heráclito dentro de un espíritu aristotélico. Se pretende mostrar que allí ya se hallan esbozados ciertos temas que serán desarrollados por el Estagirita, como la predicación pros hen del ser o una concepción más elevada de la divinidad.

Se trata de un pequeño estudio sobre el problema del mal radical en Kant. La naturaleza del mal como algo inserto en el mismo yo manifiesta una cierta irrevocabilidad del mal a la vez que es un signo de algunas de las limitaciones del sistema kantiano.

In these pages the author intends to examine the idea, quite widespread among Aristotle’s recent scholars, that the method of metaphysics were mainly dialectical. This problem is investigated in Aquinas, who decidedly denies that metaphysics uses dialectics because it just provides probability. Metaphysics, unlike dialectics, is not only based on the being of reason but also on the natural being. Therefore, it does not simply constitute a rational game about quiddities, but it studies things in their real actuality and must therefore be supported by evidence. Although Aquinas agrees with Aristotle in affirming that not every science enjoys the same certainty, this fact is due to different reasons. First, all things do not possess the same stability and constancy. Secondly, there is not always a perfect match between the studied matter and the human faculty to ascertain. This match between the object and the subject is the most decisive factor for the certainty of sciences.

A review of Spanish philosopher Antonio Millán-Puelles' book “La estructura de la subjetividad”. He shows that the human consciousness is a consciousness sited in a finite being and no Idealism is allowed (nor transcendental Idealism).

Estas páginas resumen la primera parte de la obra del filósofo español del s. XX, Antonio Millán-Puelles, "La estructura de la subjetividad". Éste lleva a cabo un estudio de la capacidad cognoscitiva humana desde un punto de vista metafísico. Pone de manifiesto la radical finitud de la conciencia, que no puede comprenderse bajo ninguna forma de idealismo (tampoco trascendental). La conciencia humana es siempre una conciencia dada en un ser finito (y corpóreo) y esto hace que posea una serie de características peculiares; en concreto, la imposibilidad de un autoconocimiento directo.
Al final se añade un excursus que habla sobre la concepción del concepto de ente y los grados de abstracción.

Alexander of Aphrodisias understood the Aristotle´s Unmoved Mover as efficient cause only to the extent that it is the final cause of heaven, which by moving strives to imitate the divine rest. Aquinas seems to agree with him. However his interpretation is original and philosophically more satisfactory: God is the efficient cause of the world, not only as creator, but also as it´s ruler. In this way God is also the final cause.

Debió de ser Alejandro de Afrodisia quien introdujo la idea de que el motor inmóvil de Aristóteles era causa eficiente sólo en la medida en que fuera la causa final del alma del cielo que, moviéndose, aspiraba a imitar la quietud divina. Santo Tomás de Aquino parece estar de acuerdo. Sin embargo, su solución es original y logra dar una explicación filosóficamente más coherente: Dios es causa eficiente del mundo no sólo como creador, sino también como su gobernante. Por esa misma razón es también causa final.

"Rego compares Aristotle with a contemporary philosopher, Antonio Livi. He searchs his realist Theory, which stands under the name of "philosophy of common sense or alethic logic," in Aristotelian philosophy. So he looks for the material logic in Aristotle.
The first part deals with the common sense in the methodology of Aristotle, while the second reviews the verification of the five judgments implicitly made ​​by common sense according to Livi."

In the last few years, a new paradigm of the knowledge of the divinity in Aristotle has emerged, affording the possibility of understanding him as efficient cause. In that case, if God is efficient cause and gives rise to teleology, this must have some existential significance for man. We can ask ourselves therefore whether the knowledge of metaphysics can offer some orientation also for ethics. Yet if this were true, the need would arise to deepen the question of how much the gods love men and what would the nature of their relationship be to natural justice. Given that man is born and lives thanks to the divinity, the conclusion is that two consequences follow: a response of religious thanksgiving is needed but also, that since the will of the divinity desires the good for man, the human search for happiness is the same as the fulfillment of the divine law. All this is explained, to a certain extent, in the context of the friendship between man and the divine.

"This work is, as the subtitle indicates, a commentary on the fragments of the lost dialogue entitled On philosophy.
It is worthy to be noted the study of the context of the fragments. The personal understanding of the concept of theos and theios in Aristotle is also interesting."

Anaxagoras’ “nous” has a cosmological value.  Additionally, it has inspired interesting reflections in order to understand metaphysically the intellect.  The question we want to answer is twofold.  On one hand, we will inquire whether or not Anaxagoras has understood correctly the nature of the intellect.  On the other hand, we will discern if our author has understood the peculiarity of consciousness.  The answer to these questions will probably be negative.  Notwithstanding that, it will be possible to ask whether or not Anaxagoras was able to detect at least the basic elements for a metaphysics of the intellect and, consequently, for an ontology of consciousness.

If the prime mover must be considered as efficient cause and not only as a final cause, then one must ask: why does God move the heavens? We hold the position that the anthropocentrism which Aristotle maintains is able to sufficiently justify the thesis that God moves the spheres so that human beings may exist. This provides an additional motive for accepting providence, which is manifestly ordered specifically towards man.