Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 6. - Thomas of Sutton (d. ca. 1315), Ordinary Question 4 (excerpts):

  • Edited and translated by Russell L. Friedman, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium, Can Laurens Löwe, Saint Louis University
  • Book:
    Medieval Philosophical Writings on the Powers of the Soul
    Published online:
    10 April 2025
    Print publication:
    17 April 2025, pp 104-121

  • Summary

    In Ordinary Question 4, of which we have translated a large excerpt, Thomas of Sutton argues that the soul and its powers are distinct. Sutton’s strategy for defending the distinction theory is, roughly, two-pronged. First, Sutton develops his own conception of power and act. Second, he aims to show that Aquinas’ arguments for the distinction theory, in particular the Category Argument, are sound, despite objections to the contrary. Key to Sutton’s own conception of power and act are two ideas. The first is that a power is a kind of possibility. Specifically, a power is a possibility that remains when it is actualized. The second idea is that powers and acts are mutually exclusive kinds of being. No act is a power, and no power is an act. Since the soul is a kind of act according to the Aristotelian view, this entails, for Sutton, that the soul is not its powers. In this text, Sutton also seeks to rebut Henry’s regress argument against Aquinas. He argues that this argument is predicated on a mistaken conception of how necessary accidents or propria relate to their bearers.