This work intends to verify how the theme of the “logically first” name of God, beginning from the self-revelation of God in Exodus 3:14, manifests amply the difference between the theological and the ontological perspectives of Thomas Aquinas and those of the Jesuit theologian Francisco Suárez. After a brief presentation of some fundamental elements of Doctor Angelicus’ doctrine about the “Ego sum Qui sum”, the text proposes a reading of the Disputatio de divina existentia et subsistentia, the work of the Spanish thinker contemporary to the Disputationes Metaphysicae but less known than it.
The critique of St Thomas to the ontological argument (ST I, q.2, a.1) in the reading of the Dominican Masters of the “School of Salamanca”
This paper addresses the evaluation and critique of the so-called “ontological argument” in Scholasticism and in the philosophy of the modern period. There is offered a survey of texts of various Dominican Masters of theology who, prevalently in the University of Salamanca, have commented on the reply furnished by St Thomas Aquinas to the argument of id quo maius cogitari nequit, stated in a. 1 of q. 2 of the I Pars of the Summa.
We dedicate our attention also –but only in the particular case of Godoy– to the question (treated instead in a. 2 of q. 2) of the possibility or otherwise of demonstrating the existence of God with an a priori proof. In this way it will be possible to lay out the evidence that just as the two problems are distinct, to which Aquinas dedicates two different articles in q. 2 of the I Pars of the Summa Theologiae, so too there effectively result diverse debates which will have their origin in the Scholasticism of the modern period