prepare initially for BASICS OF LOGIC 101: e.g., how many parts of contradiction? predetermine your predicate terms; etc.
It very quickly gets extremely exciting, however. Much of the value of Abelard's work lies in him working through what we would call today the epistemic posture of the speaker toward his proposition. The fathers frequently utter propositions without actually assenting to them; sometimes they incline to hold them as true, sometimes they actually dissent from them as such. BUT--and here's the kicker--they often dont tell you and/or you often can't tell.
Thus, when you find an ACTUALLY false prop in the fathers, beware that you do not count it immediately as an error of the fathers. The patristic world is extremely complex, and you can only say that a father erred when you can prove (1) that his prop is actually false (=signifies an actually false judgmnet) AND (2) that he firmly held to that false judgment (=assented).
^^This is a big deal. And Abelard expands this basic point very thoroughly, with all the things you have to watch out for.
Abelard also references my favorite and perhaps the most infamous example of this: when Augustine and Jerome fought for something like 10 years via letter, because Jerome had included (without indicating that it wasn't his own actual thoughts) Origen's comments in his Galatians commentary. Wups.
Excited for this!
prepare initially for BASICS OF LOGIC 101: e.g., how many parts of contradiction? predetermine your predicate terms; etc.
It very quickly gets extremely exciting, however. Much of the value of Abelard's work lies in him working through what we would call today the epistemic posture of the speaker toward his proposition. The fathers frequently utter propositions without actually assenting to them; sometimes they incline to hold them as true, sometimes they actually dissent from them as such. BUT--and here's the kicker--they often dont tell you and/or you often can't tell.
Thus, when you find an ACTUALLY false prop in the fathers, beware that you do not count it immediately as an error of the fathers. The patristic world is extremely complex, and you can only say that a father erred when you can prove (1) that his prop is actually false (=signifies an actually false judgmnet) AND (2) that he firmly held to that false judgment (=assented).
^^This is a big deal. And Abelard expands this basic point very thoroughly, with all the things you have to watch out for.
Abelard also references my favorite and perhaps the most infamous example of this: when Augustine and Jerome fought for something like 10 years via letter, because Jerome had included (without indicating that it wasn't his own actual thoughts) Origen's comments in his Galatians commentary. Wups.