Coincidence of Opposites?

[joshrp]

Hi,

I was thinking of the role of opposites in our understanding. The idea of “coincidence of opposities”, which I think I first heard of in my study of Nicholas of Cusa’s work came to mind. I think St. Bonaventure had similar idea, but I really don’t know. What thoughts do you have on the role of opposites in understanding reality. Also, can you ask God to help me understand the answers to the question I am asking?

Thank you and God bless,
Joshua

 

[Theophorus]

St. bona constructed, as did many others a kind of ‘negative theology’ that is we can say for definite what God is not, not so much what he is, but from knowing what he is not we can say something about Him. For instance we know God cannot die, Therefore we know he is im-mortal(lit. Not-mortal) and so forth.

 

[TS_Aquinas]

Hi,

I was thinking of the role of opposites in our understanding. The idea of “coincidence of opposities”, which I think I first heard of in my study of Nicholas of Cusa’s work came to mind. I think St. Bonaventure had similar idea, but I really don’t know. What thoughts do you have on the role of opposites in understanding reality. Also, can you ask God to help me understand the answers to the question I am asking?

Thank you and God bless,
Joshua

Reality? As in, our world? The role of opposites in this reality is the union of substantial form and primary matter.

 

[Theophorus]

Reality? As in, our world? The role of opposites in this reality is the union of substantial form and primary matter.

Are you saying with this that the unity of prime matter and substantial form is one of inherent opposition? Rather than of a substantial unity? Or are you simply refering to the immateriality of the form and the material nature of matter(of course prime matter is a philosophical construct and does not exist as a material reality, that’s why I ask)

The first option sounds more like the theories of Heraclitus and the pre-socratics with their elemental combinations which comprise reality than Aristotle.

While Nicolad Cusa’s work relates to the relationship between the finite and the infinite.

 

[TS_Aquinas]

Are you saying with this that the unity of prime matter and substantial form is one of inherent opposition? Rather than of a substantial unity? Or are you simply refering to the immateriality of the form and the material nature of matter(of course prime matter is a philosophical construct and does not exist as a material reality, that’s why I ask)

The latter. Though I probably should have used Aquinas’s essence & esse rather than form/matter.

While Nicolad Cusa’s work relates to the relationship between the finite and the infinite.

Yeah, I was reading up on that which is why I was wondering why this was being applied to our world.