|
Boy -- you're really testing my memory here, roachboy. I haven't studied medieval philosophy in years, and when I did, my focus was Philosophical Anthropology, not Metaphysics or Epistemology. But you do seem confused.
1. A further comment on your earlier post: Aquinas did not outline the counterposition to Ockham; at least, not in the sense that he was responding to Ockham. Aquinas lived about a generation before Ockham. Additionally, it was Duns Scotus who was more influential until around the time of the reformation, so to the extent the Church tended towards a position other than Ockham's, it would have been Scotus's.
2. The statement "God exists" is a tautology for Aquinas, but not for the reasons you aver. God is perfectly simple, according to Aquinas, so he is his own existence. Therefore, the predicate in that statement does not add any meaning to the statement. That's why its a tautology.
3. Aquinas was not a Platonist, he was an Aristotelian. I can't remember exactly how he describes the relation between particulars and universals, and my books on this are at home. I hope to give you a further response later.
As far as most Protestant denominations rejecting nominalism; well, I think this would be hard to say. I do know that my own denomination would count among its Catholic forerunners Duns Scotus, who was more nominalistic than Aquinas (though not as much as Ockham).
__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."
"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
|