Thomas Aquinas and the decline of anagogic dimension of art

• Grant number: 14/00878-9
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships abroad - Research
• Start date: May 01, 2014
• End date: April 30, 2015
• Field of knowledge: Humanities - Philosophy - History of Philosophy
• Principal Investigator: Andrey Ivanov
• Grantee: Andrey Ivanov
• Host Investigator: Andreas Speer
• Host Institution: Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências (FFC). Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP). Campus de Marília. Marília , SP, Brazil
• Institution abroad: University of Cologne (UoC), Germany

Abstract

In our research we analyze the theory of Thomas Aquinas on ars in confrontation with Dionysius-Eriugeana theory about anagogy (or metaphor) and theophany in connection with ars. Our treatment involves three phases: i) understanding the ars in Aquinas; ii) the anagogic dimension of ars; iii) the decline of anagogic dimension. Thomas develops his thought in the Expositio on Nicomachean Ethics and the Summa Theologica, and its main contribution comprises the definition and essence of ars as implying human reason, and ars itself as distinct from experimentum and prudentia. He provides the theoretical elements for consideration of an autonomous 'art'. Then, we emphasize the thought of John Scotus Erigena in his comments to Dionysus and his reception of Dionysian philosophy and theology in the On the nature and the Expositio on Celestial Hierarchy. Here, ars has an anagogic function, which constitutes the beauty of artificium as metaphor and theophany. The thought is conducted by images to the intelligible realm. Finally, anagogic dimension declines with the reception in the thirteenth century of the Aristotelian corpus, causing an epochal turn to abstract thought. Therefore, in the theme and title of the present work is implied the problem of the opposition metaphor-concept circumscribed to the theme of ars in the medieval period. It seems that is coherent with the philosophy of Thomas that metaphor and theophany may inhere accidentally in ars as its subject. Then the problem would present a paradox. Thus, we will defend throughout our work the central hypothesis that understanding of ars in Aquinas is not opposed, in systematic point of view, to the metaphorical and theophanic dimension.