Articles
L. Schumacher, 'The lost legacy of Anselm's argument: re-thinking the purpose of proofs for the existence of God' in Modern Theology, 27 (2011) 87-101.
Ian Logan comments: Schumacher stresses Anselm's Augustinianism leading her to depart somewhat from Anselm's text, which is why, I suspect, she has to say that 'Anselm implicitly concludes' in introducing a key step in her argument. She should perhaps have addressed what Anselm says in Ep. 136 to Fulk. He argues that rational arguments should be used against the impious so that they can see how irrational their rejection is, whilst Christians should accept on faith and progress to understanding. Schumacher's account addresses the Christian element of Anselm's Proslogion argument, but ignores the role of the unbeliever. The fool of the Proslogion is an unbeliever, and that is not irrelevant to what Anselm is doing in his argument.
Reviews
T.J. Holopainen, 'Review of Ian Logan, Reading Anselm's Proslogion: The History of Anselm's Argument and its Significance Today' in Heythrop Journal, 52 (2011) 129-130.
Ian Logan comments: Holopainen too fails to understand the significance of the role of the unbeliever in the Proslogion.
To notify me of recent publications, forthcoming events or anything of interest to Anselm scholars, please contact me using the form provided:
Tuesday, 11 January 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
