Thomas Aquinas: The Cogitative Power with Dr. Barker (video interview and Q and A)

 Non-specialist introduction to Aquinas on the Cogitative Power

and to the historical background in Aristotle, Avicenna and Averroes.

Introduction to the Cogitative and Internal Senses (article)

Unlike the scholarly articles below, the article linked in this post presumes little prior knowledge of philosophy in general or of Aquinas in particular, and is meant to be accessible to a broader audience. 

 As interest in Aquinas's psychology grows, this brief introduction may help readers with what is usually an unfamiliar topic:

http://www.digitallife.center/images/Dianoetikon/Mark-Barker_The-Cogitative-Power_Dianoetikon.pdf

One sometimes reads that Aquinas denies that humans have an estimative power (e.g. see C. Ripperger). As one would expect, there is some truth in this. However, the cogitative power also performs estimative functions; as A. Suarez and Klubertanz intimated long ago. Hence, the linked article divides the cogitative's six functions in light of its estimative as distinct from rational functions (see p. 171-173). Lastly, it briefly (but, one may hope, adequately) replies to the claim that Aquinas changed his mind on the cogitative/estimative over time.

The whole issue of Dianoetikon is of interest regarding the contemporary relevance of the cogitative power. The issue concludes with a helpful bibliography:

http://www.digitallife.center/index.php/journal

 

Status update: The linked article concludes by mentioning a forthcoming scholarly book. Though I have not abandoned that project, researching the cogitative and the internal senses and their historical background involves many complex issues, and I have broadened the scope of my research to include the soul and its powers in general. I would rather complete genuine scholarly contributions than just another article covering much that has already been said, perhaps repeatedly (and in different languages). Unfortunately, the price to pay for that is that results are not quickly found.

I would be remiss if I did not express my gratitude to my institution (Notre Dame Seminary in New Orleans) and to my colleagues (Jim Jacobs, Fr. Philip Neri Powell, o.p., and David Liberto) for providing me time to work on what has turned out to be a long-term project.

Talks: Philosophy and Neuroscience; Natural Theology

Thanks to the Thomistic Institutes at Yale and Mississippi for the invitations to give these talks.

1) "Why Modern Science Cannot Explain Away the Human Soul."
Since this was given at Yale, my intent was, in part, to provide an alternative to Prof. Shelly Kagan's course and book entitled Death; at least, as far as possible within a 45-minute lecture.

Phil. vs. Literature vs. Science on the Soul


Handout: Soul handout

2) "Is Belief in God Rational?"
While mainly philosophical, I briefly address the relationship between Biblical faith and reason, as well as briefly reply to R. Dawkins' (mis-)use of some Biblical texts.

Is-belief-in-god-rational

Handout: Nat. Theo. handout

Both audio's include the Q and A at the end.

The Cogitative Power: Objects and Terminology (full text)

My article in the Thomist included a promissory note referring to a forthcoming book.

The good news is that much progress has been made on the book project.   

However, until it is published, my dissertation addresses various topics in sufficient detail to benefit interested readers. 

The book manuscript is now so far removed from the dissertation in terms of documentation, depth of analysis, etc. that it compares to the relevant parts of the dissertation as my two articles compare to chapters 2 and 7. 

 For the expanded and corrected versions of chapters 2 and 7, see the post below from 2012: “Recent work on the Cogitative Power.” As is the case with the two articles, while the book does not alter the fundamental conclusions in the dissertation, it does correct or modify many points of detail.

Even after the book is (God willing) published, the dissertation may be of interest regarding the secondary literature. Since the book is intended for a broader audience, it omits or abbreviates some discussion of and many references to scholarly articles.

The dissertation seeks to pick up where Klubertanz's book left off in 1952 by addressing all the secondary literature since then, and re-examining all the primary texts. Ideally, one would read Klubertanz before reading this dissertation. Sadly, it is out of print.

If you make use of this dissertation, please be so kind as to acknowledge it in relevant footnotes. 

 

I close with the late Fr. Benedict Ashley’s comments: “I have at last finished reading your dissertation, but will continue ponder it. It is really a fine work dealing with a very important subject and I have already learned much from it….Your discussion of the roles of the cogitative, of intentions, and of sortals are extremely helpful…I see I will have to revise my thinking of such points a great deal.” (email, 21 May 2009)

Feel free to recommend the text to Thomists in particular, Medieval philosophers in general, or to anyone interested in philosophical psychology or epistemology.

Abstract:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0CjaoSjGC9iLThQWmt1cWJSY00

Contents:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1EZLy3uKkqVouLg3yvaKIeC7GAReB5fWM

Introduction:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1xdzY78utyBWYYxlImGxV5Ac5jIOXLSjU

Ch. 1:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1XFj0_UoPe0iVuerQwJV3fYwl463iW19O

Ch. 2:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0CjaoSjGC9ia0FUak9XNFhQZ3c

 Ch. 3:
 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1P8XrJ47G97REZn0tA28JEtxk_zm2QoHx

Ch. 4:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=11LvdRtF1AB4YwprLlsYYy2u1OyRjPxcW

Ch. 5:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=12Ia73kSUnIg7odO5Q5-2JfXIjcD3SBiO

Ch. 6:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Baa3L1rxdl9OakdvXTgMTmZGRldGx8jI

Ch. 7:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0CjaoSjGC9iXzFNWG5VZ3RwZGM

Ch. 8:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1gdpVY1cmIc5IyONpxAk7TSqRhXMpwRLy

Ch. 9:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1R8dyLBH_TSi5HGfuP_z2Zu716HVqXDYx

Conclusion:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1FZu31yKzJ7MJQ3H3Sc1TT3FZw0nVf1d9

Bibliography:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=16KRqri9xyiJYYu1sIDkYgBVCXiUVuVhx

Angels and devils (non-cogitative-related)

Here is an interview on pure spirits (angels and devils) from a philosophical and theological perspective; given 4/19/12 on Focus Catholic Television (New Orleans). It is based on my course on angelology and demonology.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHwqULqDvsc

Bioethics: Craniotomy and material cooperation with evil (non-cogitative related)

This critique of Rhonheimer’s book Vital Conflicts is not related to the cogitative, but may be of interest. For those who don't have access to the published, final draft, here is a link to the final proof.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0CjaoSjGC9iUFQ0dUN0c2syWXc

In a somewhat similar vein, here is an article that addresses a particular case of what I considered to be material cooperation with evil (written in a more popular style).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0CjaoSjGC9iZnI1TlhMcmpjU0E/view?usp=sharing

Recent work on the Cogitative Power

For my published work on the cogitative power and the internal senses in Aquinas, see: 

• Barker, Mark J. “Aquinas on Internal Sensory Intentions: Nature and Classification.” International Philosophical Quarterly 52.2 (June 2012): 199-226.
• available here
  
• Barker, Mark J. “Experience and Experimentation: The Meaning of Experimentum in Aquinas.” Thomist 76.1 (January 2012): 37-71.
•  available here

These studies originated in two chapters of my dissertation: “The Cogitative Power: Objects and Terminology” (final draft August 2006,  defended May 2007, Center for Thomistic Studies, Houston). Here is an abstract: 
 
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0CjaoSjGC9iLThQWmt1cWJSY00

I am posting chapters 2 (download) and 7 (here) from my dissertation for two reasons:

1. For didactic purposes. They serve this purpose, insofar as the treatment is simpler and less detailed than in the corresponding scholarly articles. Given the frequent lack of familiarity with the internal senses, they may be worth reading prior to looking at the definitive published treatments. The investment of time and effort is minimal, given the chapters' brevity, but they  serve to highlight the points I have expanded on in the articles. They also contain references to secondary sources omitted from the articles so as not to over-burden the reader.
2. For archaeological reasons. That is, they indicate the point of research attained as of 2007, and thus serve to show some of the more obvious (relatively speaking) points about intentions and experience, as well as points that were later corrected. 

For scholarly purposes, these documents are entirely superseded by the aforementioned two articles, respectively.