| dc.description.abstract | My dissertation deals with Aquinas Aristotelian Commentaries problems, focusing especially on the
epistemological value of these works and on the exegetical principles displayed by the author
expounding Aristotle's texts. What is exactly the value of Aristotelian Commentaries? Are they
genuinely philosophical or rather theological texts? And what about the procedure used by Thomas?
Does it have an objective, scientific, or confessional value? In the first two chapters, I will suggest
that scholar's issues could be easily re-evaluated both historically and historiographically, addressing
the subject of Aquinas general purpose in his activity of Aristotelian Commentator and reconsidering
the main representative views on his own exegetical method. Furthermore, in the course of chapter
four, adopting an historical-comparative methodology, widely described in chapter three, I shall
underline the substantial dualism of Thomas's exegetical method, analyzing the notanda of the
Sententia libri De anima, namely some of the most significant and personal exegetical texts of his
first Aristotelian Commentary. In fact, what emerges from the analysis of Aquinas exegetical method,
compared for instance with that of Richard Rufus, Adam Buckfield and Albert the Great, is that it
possesses both scientific and confessional components, thus reducing the fundamental dichotomy
previously identified by some scholars. Finally, a pie chart located in chapter three shows the results
of the survey, with the ultimate intent of more fully documenting the research carried out. [edited by Author] | it_IT |
