Babai the Great and Dionysius bar Salibi on the Evagrian Theory of "Spiritual Senses" (Symposium Syriacum XII, Rome, 19-24 August, 2016) (original) (raw)
Related papers
ORIGENIANA DUODECIMA, 2019
In his first articles, Hans Urs von Balthasar strongly criticized a tendency towards spiritualism, which began with Origen and pervaded the patristic period. At the same time, Balthasar’s love for Origen is well-known - he composed an anthology of his writings and considered him a real man of the Church. The aim of this talk is to understand how these two aspects can coexist; I suggest that one crucial point of this relation is the value of human body. The central point will be Balthasar’s account of the spiritual senses, which describes the perceptive senses of our spiritual and earthly bodies (in contrast to Karl Rahner, who views the spiritual senses as a tool of mystical experience of God). Balthasar’s reading underlines that we can only know the invisible God through the visible images: the spiritual senses are only “activated” by Christ’s coming into this corporeal world. The body is therefore the “theater" that God has set as point of contact with him: corporeality has, therefore, a “pervasive sacramental structure”.
Theophrastus on Perceiving [penultimate version]
Rhizomata, 2019
Many fragments of interest from Theophrastus on perception are preserved by the late Neoplatonist, Priscian of Lydia. After some preliminary discussion of source criticism and how to identify the fragments, I turn to his discussions of perceiving and perceptual awareness. While Theophrastus clearly rejects literalism, he also does not embrace "spiritualism": he argues instead that we receive the defining proportions of perceptible qualities in the sense organ, though if this is to avoid literalism, it must be in different contraries than in the perceptible. If Priscian's report is faithful, he also accepts a moderate capacity reading of De anima 3.2, locating awareness in a central monitoring sense, common to the individual modalities; and this has further implications for the unity of consciousness. Theophrastus' method, though aporetic in form, is nonetheless a constructive engagement with the same texts of Aristotle we have ourselves, in the service of a common research program in psychology that he shared with his colleague and former teacher.
Feeling the Life of the Mind: Mere Judging, Feeling, and Judgment
2017
Hughes argues that in the Analytic of the Beautiful Kant introduces an account of feeling that operates as a non-cognitive and yet reflective form of awareness. The range of modes of awareness – which hitherto comprised sensible intuitions, concepts of understanding and conceptually determining judgments, but also ideas and principles of reason – is extended to include a new distinctively aesthetic type of judgments that have feeling as their ground. Crucially, Kant views this development as the condition of the integrity of his critical system.
Body and Spirit in the Middle Ages: Literature, Philosophy, Medicine, 2020
My deliberations on how human sense perception was conceived in the medical, the philosophical, and the theological discourses of the Middle Ages will be divided into two parts. In order to illustrate the thesis that there may have been dissimilar anthropologies at play in different medieval discourses, I will present two examples, one pertaining to sense perception processes in general, the other to a subdivision of perception that was particularly problematic for Christian theology: sensory perception as a source of sensual pleasure.-The first part is by no means intended as an original contribution. It will merely serve to highlight certain components of a well-known discussion. Its function within the logic of my paper will be to substantiate the claim that the second example I will present, which may be original to some extent, is not an exception but may rather be seen as symptomatic of a more general discursive feature of the period under scrutiny. The medieval theory of sense perception involves three descriptive levels: firstly, the external senses; secondly, the internal senses and the faculties by which they are governed; thirdly, the brain. Physicians, philosophers and theologians seem not to have differed in opinion with respect to two of these three levels. As far as the first level, the exterior senses, are concerned, this is not surprising. They differentiated the following items: visus (sight), auditus (hearing), olfactus (smell), tactus (touch), and gustus (taste). We still adhere to this classification today. The other level with respect to which the medical, theological, and philosophical anthropologies largely agreed was the assumption that the data collected by the external senses were processed in the brain, and that this organ was divided into three ventricles (ventriculi), each with a specific function in processing these data. Physicians based this model on their findings resulting from dissections. Herophilus of Alexandria (3 rd century BCE) seems to have been the first to have practiced such dissections.1 While Herophilus distinguishes four ventricles, the 1 His writings have not been transmitted directly; they are known to us only through Galen (2 nd century CE). See