GIULIO D’ONOFRIO Reading Anselm A correct approach to the philosophical-theological writings from the late ancient or early medieval period cannot leave out an adequate overview of the original coherence that the author established among the form of the words, the interior ideas, and the effective procedures of argumentation that correspond to them. By reading Anselm today with the desire of reconstructing and interpreting correctly the philosophical-cultural categories existing in his time, the particularities of his style, and the linguistic-formal directions of his sources, it is possible to propose new ways for the approach to his thought that are free of comparative preconceptions and inadequate interpretations founded on models of thought that are foreign to his mental universe. The proofs of the Monologion show the use of Augustine (above all his gnoseology) and Boethius, as well as the use of the theory and terminology of dialectic that had been canonized in the eleventh century. Anselm also appears to be clearly influenced by the doctrine of the Neo-Platonic ontological triad and applies, through an approach to the comprehension of the Trinitarian mysteries, a rigorous use of the logic of the ‘term’ and in particular of the definitio. Furthermore, the celebrated definition of God on which is founded the entire theoretical construction of the Proslogion appears to be a notio, developed again according to the rules of dialectic that had been codified by Boethius and Marius Victorinus. The formal structure of the unum argumentum, however, is correctly inserted into the doctrine of the ‘topic’, as treated by Cicero by way of Aristotle, that is proposed in particular as an application of the topos ex repugnantibus, which the sources on dialectic define simply as enthymema and which found ample use in the early medieval philosophical literature.
L’accostamento corretto agli scritti di ambito filosofico-teologico di epoca tardo-antica o altomedievale non può prescindere da una adeguata percezione della originaria coerenza che l’autore stabiliva tra la forma delle parole e le nozioni interiori e gli effettivi procedimenti argomentativi ad esse corrispondenti. Leggendo oggi Anselmo con l’aspirazione di ricostruire e interpretare correttamente le categorie filosofico-culturali vigenti nel suo tempo, le peculiarità del suo stile e gli orientamenti linguistico-formali delle sue fonti, è possibile proporre nuove chiavi di accostamento al suo pensiero, libere da preconcetti comparativistici e da interpretazioni inadeguate, fondate su modelli di pensiero estranei al suo universo mentale. Le prove del Monologion mostrano l’utilizzo di Agostino (soprattutto della sua gnoseologia) e Boezio, nonché della teoria e della terminologia dialettica come canonizzata nel secolo XI; Anselmo appare anche chiaramente influenzato dalla dottrina della triade ontologica neoplatonica e applica, per un avvicinamento alla comprensione dei misteri trinitari, un rigoroso utilizzo della logica del termine e in particolare della definitio; inoltre, la celebre definizione di Dio su cui è fondata l’intera costruzione teoretica del Proslogion appare essere una notio, elaborata ancora secondo le regole della dialettica codificate da Boezio e Mario Vittorino. La struttura formale dell’unum argumentum, del resto, si inserisce correttamente nell’ambito della dottrina topica così come è trattata da Cicerone sulla base di Aristotele, proponendosi in particolare come una applicazione del topos ex repugnantibus, che le fonti dialettiche definiscono anche semplicemente enthymema e che ha trovato ampia utilizzazione nella letteratura filosofica altomedievale.
Leggere Anselmo
D'ONOFRIO, Giulio
2017
Abstract
GIULIO D’ONOFRIO Reading Anselm A correct approach to the philosophical-theological writings from the late ancient or early medieval period cannot leave out an adequate overview of the original coherence that the author established among the form of the words, the interior ideas, and the effective procedures of argumentation that correspond to them. By reading Anselm today with the desire of reconstructing and interpreting correctly the philosophical-cultural categories existing in his time, the particularities of his style, and the linguistic-formal directions of his sources, it is possible to propose new ways for the approach to his thought that are free of comparative preconceptions and inadequate interpretations founded on models of thought that are foreign to his mental universe. The proofs of the Monologion show the use of Augustine (above all his gnoseology) and Boethius, as well as the use of the theory and terminology of dialectic that had been canonized in the eleventh century. Anselm also appears to be clearly influenced by the doctrine of the Neo-Platonic ontological triad and applies, through an approach to the comprehension of the Trinitarian mysteries, a rigorous use of the logic of the ‘term’ and in particular of the definitio. Furthermore, the celebrated definition of God on which is founded the entire theoretical construction of the Proslogion appears to be a notio, developed again according to the rules of dialectic that had been codified by Boethius and Marius Victorinus. The formal structure of the unum argumentum, however, is correctly inserted into the doctrine of the ‘topic’, as treated by Cicero by way of Aristotle, that is proposed in particular as an application of the topos ex repugnantibus, which the sources on dialectic define simply as enthymema and which found ample use in the early medieval philosophical literature.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.