Double truth

Double truth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Double-truth theory is the view that religion and philosophy, as separate sources of knowledge, might arrive at contradictory truths without detriment to either.[1]

Latin Averroism[edit]

In medieval Europe, the Church was specifically opposed to “Latin Averroists” (see Averroës), such as the prominent Averroist Siger of Brabant. It sought to halt the spread of certain of Aristotle‘s doctrines — those that dealt with physical science[2][3] (see Aristotelian physics, Condemnations of 1210-1277), which the reconquest of Spain and, accordingly, access to the libraries of the Moors had re-introduced into the Latin literate world.[citation needed]

Neoplatonism and Aristotelianism[edit]

At the time, much of the theology of the Roman Catholic Church was influenced by Neoplatonic ideas, and Aristotelianism struck many as heretical.[4][5] Siger and others seem to have conceded this, and to have used the sharp reason/faith distinction that came to be known as “double truth” as a way of legitimizing discussion of Aristotle despite that concession.[6] The teachings of Aristotle came to be accepted as second only to the teachings of the Church. Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologica (1267–73), rejected Neoplatonism and stated that there can be no conflict between reason and faith.[7][8]

Revival in the Renaissance[edit]

Questions remained, and again came to the fore when scientists such as Copernicus made discoveries which seemed to contradict scripture. The doctrine of “double truth” was revived by the scholastics under therubric “two truths”. Thus, according to the scholastics, there was a lesser truth, that the Earth circled the Sun, as Copernicus said, and a greater truth, that when Joshua fought at Jericho it was the Sun, not the Earth, which stood still. The scholastics held that both “truths” were true in their own sphere.[9][10]

Francis Bacon exemplifies this concept in his book The Advancement of Learning arguing that the fact that revelation was contrary to reason is what gave value to faith.[11]

Historical relevance of the concept[edit]

Today both sides of the controversy reject the “double truth” concept, and it is primarily of historical interest.[citation needed]

References[edit]

  1. Jump up^ “double-truth theory”. Encyclopedia Britannica.
  2. Jump up^ Gilson, Etienne, Reason and Revelation in the Middle Ages, Charles Scribner’s Sons 1938 (1966 Reprint), pp. 19-30
  3. Jump up^ See, e.g., Gilson, Etienne, “La doctrine de la double vérité,” Études de philosophie médiévale (1921), pp. 51-69; translated as, History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages (1955).
  4. Jump up^ John Francis Quinn (1973). The historical constitution of St. Bonaventure’s philosophy. PIMS. ISBN 978-0-88844-023-5.
  5. Jump up^ “The Metaphysics of John Duns Scotus”, pathways (essays), Fr. Seamus Mulholland
  6. Jump up^ See, e.g.,
  7. Jump up^ St Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologica (translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province), Christian Classics, 1981, ISBN 0-87061-063-5 ISBN 978-0870610639.
  8. Jump up^ “The Battle of Aristotle”, Arthur Little, Studies: An Irish Quarterly Review, Vol. 36, No. 141 (Mar., 1947), pp. 57–68
  9. Jump up^ Will Durant, The Reformation, Simon and Schuster, 1957.
  10. Jump up^ See also: Dictionary of the History of Ideas Double Truth
  11. Jump up^ The History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russel (1947), Allen & Unwin, p. 564.

Leave a comment