Analecta Husserliana The Yearbook of Phenomenological Research Volume CXX The Presence of Duns Scotus in the Thought of Edith Stein The question of individuality Francesco Alfieri Translated by George Metcalf 123 Analecta Husserliana The Yearbook of Phenomenological Research Volume CXX Founder Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka, The World Institute for Advanced Phenomenological Research and Learning, Hanover, USA Series editors William S. Smith , Executive President of the World Phenomenology Institute , Hanover, NH , USA Jadwiga S. Smith , Co-President for the American division, World Phenomenology Institute , Hanover , NH , USA Daniela Verducci , The World Institute for Advanced Phenomenological Research and Learning, Macerata , Italy Published under the auspices of The World Institute for Advanced Phenomenological Research and Learning A-T. Tymieniecka, Founder More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/5621 Francesco Alfi eri The Presence of Duns Scotus in the Thought of Edith Stein The question of individuality Francesco Alfi eri Pontifi cia Universitas Lateranensis Rome , Italy Translated by George Metcalf Analecta Husserliana ISBN 978-3-319-15662-0 ISBN 978-3-319-15663-7 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-15663-7 Library of Congress Control Number: 2015931541 Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London Translation from the Italian language edition: La presenza di Duns Scoto nel pensiero di Edith Stein. La questione dell’individualità (Filosofi a, 55), Premise by H.-B. Gerl-Falkovitz, Preface by A. Ales Bello, Postface by G. d’Onofrio, © Morcelliana, Brescia, 2014. All rights reserved. © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015 T his work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. T he use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specifi c statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. T he publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. Printed on acid-free paper Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www. springer.com) To Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka, In memory of our philosophical discussions in Vermont Foreword The people that we meet are always experienced as individual beings; we deal with the individual person, never the human being in the abstract. This seemingly banal observation prompts us to refl ect on our capacity to grasp what is universal in the particular. Indeed, on meeting an individual, we see him or her in all their physical, mental and spiritual distinctiveness, and yet we are able to say that they are a man or a woman or a human being, thereby abstracting their essential characteristics. This is the famous “intuition of essences” referred to by Edmund Husserl and taken up by his student Edith Stein. 1 And it is precisely the latter phenomenologist who stresses individuality, because any encounter with the “other” always has this univo- cal character, although we express ourselves through universalising forms. W e are thus faced with an age-old problem that Aristotle himself faced: how do we acquire knowledge of the individual if our knowledge always seems to be of the universal? Anthropology was the basic theme of Edith Stein’s research, but it is precisely within this fi eld that the above-described question is posed, and those who concern themselves with philosophy cannot ignore it. The question was a constant feature of Stein’s research, from her fi rst phenomenological analyses inspired by the method proposed by Husserl until her fi nal writings, via the study of the salient moments of medieval thought. K nowing that he is a Franciscan monk, when Francesco Alfi eri told me of his intention to conduct research into the phenomenological anthropology of Edith Stein, it came to mind that she had discussed the question of individuality in her work Finite and Eternal Being , comparing Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus; what better occasion could there be to explore on the one hand Stein’s relationship with medieval thought and on the other, take stock on the question of individuality? Francesco Alfi eri accepted the proposal and indeed, he has developed it beyond expectations, not only reading the works of Stein and the main works of Duns 1 A complete bibliography of the works of Edith Stein, their translations into various languages and critical studies of the author and her thought in the world can be found in Alfi eri F. (2012). vii viii Foreword Scotus, but also conducting a critical analysis of the latter. He was supported in this undertaking by recent studies concerning the attribution of certain manuscripts to the Franciscan thinker. These studies helped clarify the question of which of Scotus’ works Stein had read and whether they were authentic, an issue that needed to be resolved before assessing the validity of her interpretation. Alfi eri’s research therefore broadened to the point where it began to encompass not only exegetics, but also philology. His work was supported by the results obtained by scholars on the Scotus Commission of the Order of Friars Minor. This forms the basis of the second and third chapters of this doctoral thesis, A historic and critical study of the “Scotist” sources used by Edith Stein and The question of the principium individuationis in the writings of Duns Scotus. Ordinatio/Lectura – Quaestiones super Libros Metaphysicorum (q. 13) . T his research is highly appreciated by specialists because it is founded on the most recent knowledge and clarifi es the relationship between Scotus and his disci- ples. Obviously Edith Stein was unaware of this, in the fi rst place because her edu- cation had involved no contact with medieval thought, and in the second place because, despite having excellent knowledge of classical languages, she had never conducted a philological study. In any case, it was not her purpose to tackle such topics, but rather to understand the theoretical contribution of the thinkers she was examining. After her conversion to Catholicism she realised that medieval thinkers had already analysed and in some cases resolved questions that were subsequently posed again, despite having already had a convincing clarifi cation. W ith characteristic precision, Stein went beyond questions of attribution and understood Scotus’ deeper meaning, expressing it in the terms of the phenomeno- logical language inherited from Husserl. Comparing Thomas Aquinas and Scotus, she observed that the prevailing interpretation of Aquinas’ position concerning the principle of individuation, based on m ateria signata quantitate, was not convincing. She preferred the concept of h aecceitas , as the ultima solitudo of Duns Scotus. She did not know that the former term perhaps did not come directly from Scotus but from his disciples, but she understood the sense of the Scotist proposition. All this is to be found in the fourth chapter of this volume on T he intangible individuality of human beings. The originality of Edith Stein’s perspective . Stein’s position, inspired by Husserl’s analyses in Formal and Transcendental Logic , stresses that from the formal point of view there exists an empty form, but in order for it to become real it needs to be fi lled by concrete individuals. For human beings, this “fi lling” is not a question of matter but a qualitative fullness, which can be expressed in Scotus’ terms as the u ltima solitudo , or in phenomenological terms as the immutable and intangible personal nucleus. I n the case of Thomas Aquinas she criticises his criterion of matter as the prin- ciple of individuation. How then to interpret the relationship between matter and form with respect to the human individual? It is here that Scotus’ idea of the u ltima realitas or the u ltima solitudo acquires greater specifi city via a qualitative fullness based on the personal nucleus. In this sense Stein can be said to have fulfi lled, albeit inadvertently, the objective which was very clear in her research: to identify conver- gences in the theoretical results of many thinkers in their enquiries into various Foreword ix aspects of reality. Her aim in this was not merely to arrive at a cosy syncretism; she held that each of them, examining the “same things”, highlighted something posi- tive and this should be valued. Nor was this facile irenicism. Indeed, when exam- ined retrospectively, the violent contrasts that characterised medieval thought actually suggest – all things considered – that there was greater convergence and unity among them than traditionally believed, a unity that emerges especially if that thought is compared with the history of the philosophy that was to follow. Stein’s return to medieval thought was not determined therefore by any need for an apol- ogy, and this is also demonstrated by the freedom with which she deals with the great philosophers of the epoch, while acknowledging their authority. On the con- trary, she argued that the contribution of those philosophers should be valued because they clarifi ed aspects that were re-examined subsequently but without obtaining the same results. The basic idea is that the history of philosophy is estab- lished by thinkers who support each other beyond time and space, because philoso- phy is a “perennial” form of research. Francesco Alfi eri’s book makes these observations, breaking down an extremely complex fi eld with great critical ability, precise analysis and cogent results. Systematically tackling the comparison of Duns Scotus and Edith Stein for the fi rst time, he helps clarify, from a historic and theoretical point of view, a highly complex and crucial argument: what is the individual and how do we come to know them? Angela Ales Bello References Alfi eri, F. (2012). Die Rezeption Edith Steins. Internationale Edith-Stein-Bibliographie (1942–2012). Festgabe für M. Amata Neyer OCD. Sondernummer des Edith Stein Jahrbuches, Vorwort von U. Dobhan, Geleitwort von H.-B. Gerl-Falkovitz – A. Ales Bello, Einführung von F. Alfi eri. Würzburg: Echter Verlag GmbH.