Malebranche e le verità eterne: onnipotenza, univocità, teodicea

novitàdigital Malebranche e le verità eterne:
onnipotenza, univocità, teodicea

Articolo

rivista	RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA NEO-SCOLASTICA
fascicolo	RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA NEO-SCOLASTICA - 2022 - 2
titolo	Malebranche e le verità eterne: onnipotenza, univocità, teodicea Malebranche and the Eternal Truths: Omnipotence, Univocity, Theodicy
Autore	Alfredo Gatto
Editore	Vita e Pensiero
formato	Articolo \| Pdf
online da	07-2022
doi	10.26350/001050_000338
issn	0035-6247 (stampa) \| 1827-7926 (digitale)

€ 6,00

Ebook in formato Pdf leggibile su questi device:

Computer
con Software:
- Adobe PDF Reader
Android
iPhone/Ipad
con App:
- Adobe PDF Reader
E-Book Reader
Ibs Tolino
Kobo

Descrizione
This article analyses the role played by the Cartesian theory of eternal truths in Malebranche’s thought. It aims both to underline the reasons that led Malebranche to criticize Descartes’ doctrin and to analyze how this opposition played a key role in the development of his own reflection. Malebranche denied the assumptions of Descartes’ theory to avoid those that he believed were the epistemological consequences of the doctrine, namely, the contingence and fragility of human knowledge and the impossibility of establishing a stable relation between God and man. Besides, Malebranche’s approach is required to lay the groundwork for his theodicy: the indifference of Cartesian God, in fact, would never let Malebranche investigate God’s reasons in order to justify his actions. Thus, the article shows that the refusal of Cartesian theory represents one of the conditions of possibility of Malebranche’s reflection. keywords Malebranche, Eternal Truths, Omnipotence, Theodicy Biografia dell'autore Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milano. Email: gatto.alfredo@unisr.it

Descrizione

This article analyses the role played by the Cartesian theory of eternal truths in Malebranche’s thought. It aims both to underline the reasons that led Malebranche to criticize Descartes’ doctrin and to analyze how this opposition played a key role in the development of his own reflection. Malebranche denied the assumptions of Descartes’ theory to avoid those that he believed were the epistemological consequences of the doctrine, namely, the contingence and fragility of human knowledge and the impossibility of establishing a stable relation between God and man. Besides, Malebranche’s approach is required to lay the groundwork for his theodicy: the indifference of Cartesian God, in fact, would never let Malebranche investigate God’s reasons in order to justify his actions. Thus, the article shows that the refusal of Cartesian theory represents one of the conditions of possibility of Malebranche’s reflection.