Advertisement

Habitus or Affectio: The Will and Its Orientation in Augustine, Anselm, and Duns Scotus

  • Kristell TregoEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Historical-Analytical Studies on Nature, Mind and Action book series (HSNA, volume 7)

Abstract

The concept of hexis, in Latin habitus, is of great importance in Aristotle’s ethics. In this paper, I ask the question whether habitus has its place, and which one it is, when the will is said to be free. I examine the doctrines of three thinkers in whose thought the idea of the freedom of the will occupies a crucial place. Firstly, Augustine knows the moral sense of habitus, but does not use it to explain freedom; reading the Categories, he understands that the term “habitus” refers to an accident, and uses this concept to explain modification. Secondly, describing the will, Anselm favours the word affectio, which designates (in the Aristotelian doctrine of the categories) a disposition which is not permanent; indeed, Anselm focuses on the dependence of the rational creature. Finally, Duns Scotus uses the Aristotelian concept of habitus, when he shows how the will, which is a rational power, determines itself freely. Thus, it can be said that Aristotle was a central and unavoidable source for the medieval developments of the concept of habitus and its use in relation with the doctrine of the will.

Keywords

Habitus Affectio Categories Power Freedom 

References

Primary Literature

  1. Anicius Manlius Boethius. 1877–1880. Commentarii in librum Aristotelis Peri Hermeneias, ed. C. Meiser. 2 vols. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymous. 1961. Anonymi paraphrasis Themistiana (Pseudo-Augustini Categoriae decem), ed. Lorenzo Minio-Paluello. AL 1.1–5. Bruges: Desclée de Brouwer.Google Scholar
  3. Anselm of Canterbury. 1946–1961. Opera Omnia, ed. F.S. Schmitt. 6 vols. Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson and Sons.Google Scholar
  4. ———. 2007. Basic Writings, ed. and trans. Thomas Williams. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
  5. Aristotle. 1972–1974. Ethica Nicomachea, translatio Roberti Grosseteste Lincolniensis, sive “Liber Ethicorum.”, ed. R.A. Gauthier. AL 26.1–3. Leiden/Brussels: Brill/Desclée de Brouwer.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 1984. The Complete Works, ed. Jonathan Barnes. 2 vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Augustine. 1948. Contra academicos, ed. R. Jolivet. Bibliothèque augustinienne, Oeuvres de Saint Augustin 4. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer. (= BA 4)Google Scholar
  8. ———. 1948. De bono coniugali, ed. Gustave Combès. Bibliothèque augustinienne, Oeuvres de Saint Augustin 2. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer. (= BA 2)Google Scholar
  9. ———. 1949. De moribus ecclesiae, ed. B. Roland-Gosselin. Bibliothèque augustinienne, Oeuvres de Saint Augustin 1. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer. (= BA 1)Google Scholar
  10. ———. 1952. De diversis quaestionibus octoginta tribus, ed. G. Bardy, J.-A. Beckaert, and J. Boutet. Bibliothèque augustinienne, Oeuvres de Saint Augustin 10. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer. (= BA 10)Google Scholar
  11. Henry of Ghent. 1979. Quodlibet I, ed. R. Macken. Henrici de Gandavo Opera Omnia 5. Leuven/Leiden: Leuven University Press/Brill. (= Opera Omnia 5)Google Scholar
  12. John Duns Scotus. 1639 (1968). Opera Omnia, ed. Luke Wadding. 12 vols. Lyon: Durand. Reprint, Hildesheim: Olms. (= Wadding)Google Scholar
  13. ———. 1950. Opera Omnia, ed. Karl Balić, et al. 21 vols. Vatican City: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis. (= Vat.)Google Scholar
  14. ———. 1997. Quaestiones super libros Metaphysicorum Aristotelis, libri VI–IX, ed. G. Etzkorn, et al. Opera Philosophica 4. St. Bonaventure. New York: The Franciscan Institute Press. (= OPh 4)Google Scholar
  15. ———. 2018. Notabilia super Metaphysicam, ed. G. Pini. Turnhout: Brepols.Google Scholar
  16. Thomas Aquinas. 1888–1906. Summa theologiae, ed. Commissio Leonina. Corpus Thomisticum online. www.corpusthomisticum.org/iopera.html.

Secondary Literature

  1. Alliney, Guido. 2013. Giovanni di Morrovale e le affectiones anselmiane. Archivum franciscanum historicum 106: 569–584.Google Scholar
  2. Boler, John F. 1993. Transcending the Natural: Duns Scotus on the Two Affections of the Will. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 67: 109–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boulnois, Olivier. 2017. Désirer la vérité. Du libre arbitre à la liberté selon Aristote, Augustin et Duns Scot. In La liberté au Moyen Âge, Annales de l’Institut de Philosophie de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles, ed. Christian Brouwer and Odile Gilon, 17–51. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  4. Brague, Rémi. 1980. De la disposition: À propos de diathesis chez Aristote. In Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique, ed. Pierre Aubenque, 285–307. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  5. Cervellon, Christophe. 2004. L’affection de justice chez Duns Scot: justice et luxure dans le péché de l’ange. In Duns Scot à Paris, 1302–2002, ed. Olivier Boulnois, Elizabeth Karger, Jean-Luc Solère, and Gérard Sondag, 425–68. Turnhout: Brepols.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gilson, Etienne. 1952. Jean Duns Scot. Introduction à ses positions fondamentales. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  7. Goebel, Bernd. 2001, Rectitudo. Wahrheit und Freiheit bei Anselm von Canterbury. Munster: Aschendorff.Google Scholar
  8. Kent, Bonnie. 2003. Rethinking Moral Dispositions: Scotus on the Virtues. In The Cambridge Companion to Duns Scotus, ed. Thomas Williams, 352–376. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Lee, Sukjae. 1998. Scotus on the Will: The Rational Power and the Dual Affections. Vivarium 36: 40–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nickl, Peter. 2005. Ordnung der Gefühle: Studien zum Begriff des Habitus. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
  11. Trego, Kristell. 2010. L’essence de la liberté: La refondation de l’éthique dans l’oeuvre de s. Anselme de Cantorbéry. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  12. ———. 2015. La liberté en actes: Éthique et métaphysique d’Alexandre d’Aphrodise à Jean Duns Scot. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  13. ———. 2017. Indifférence, indétermination, infinité. La métaphysique et la liberté de la volonté chez Henri de Gand et Duns Scot. In La liberté au Moyen Âge, Annales de l’Institut de Philosophie de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles, ed. Christian Brouwer and Odile Gilon, 165–177. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Département de philosophieUniversité Clermont AuvergneClermont-FerrandFrance

Personalised recommendations