Name: WILSON COIMBRA LEMKE
Publication date: 13/05/2026
Examining board:
Name |
Role |
|---|---|
| ANDREY IVANOV | Examinador Externo |
| BERNARDO VEIGA DE OLIVEIRA ALVES | Examinador Externo |
| FREDERICO AUGUSTO BONALDO SILVA | Examinador Externo |
| JOEL GRACIOSO | Examinador Externo |
| JORGE AUGUSTO DA SILVA SANTOS | Presidente |
Summary: A doctor of philosophy must not only indicate the causes in each question, but also be able to teach,
according to what Thomas Aquinas says in his commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics: “we call the
wisest in all science the one who can point out the causes of anything questioned and, by this means,
teach”. Therefore, the purpose of this work is to teach what belongs to the philosopher and to
philosophy, according to two writings from Aquinas’s second regency in Paris (1268-1272), namely:
the Second Part of the Summa Theologica and the beginning of the commentary on the
Metaphysics. For, as he says in the aforementioned commentary, if a name is given to things, there
can be a notion that explains the meaning of that name. Now, as is clear in the same work, this
happens with the name “philosophy”, which becomes known through the name “wisdom”, and with
the name “philosopher”, which is explained by the use of the expression “lover of wisdom”.
Therefore, in order to extract the notion of these names, so as to explain their meaning, it is
necessary to say: what do the names “wisdom” and “love” mean; how are they attributed to
philosophy and to the philosopher, and how do they relate to the ethical notions of “virtue” and
“passion”? But, since we must attain knowledge of wisdom and divine things from moral things,
and arrive at knowledge of things that transcend imagination and require a robust intellect from
things that require experience and a soul free from passions, so that, starting from the easier things,
the exposition becomes more adequate, according to the order of learning indicated by Thomas in
his commentary on Aristotle’s Ethics, we must, therefore, proceed from the meaning of “love” to the
meaning of “wisdom.” Now, love, which moves the philosopher towards beloved wisdom, is a
passion, which Thomas treats in the Summa Theologica, I-II, q. 26-28. But wisdom, which the
philosopher loves for its own sake and not for anything else, is a virtue, which he discusses in his
commentary on the Metaphysics, preface and book 1, lessons 1-3. Consequently, this work has two
parts. The first deals with the lover who calls himself a “philosopher”, according to the treatise on
love in the Summa. The second part deals with wisdom that calls itself “philosophy”, according to
the commentary on the Metaphysics. Now, love is considered in the Summa by the method of
composition; and wisdom is considered in the commentary on the Metaphysics by the method of
resolution. Therefore, the method by which we must consider the lover of wisdom and beloved
wisdom is twofold. And, from the Thomistic notions of love and wisdom, we can formulate a
certain definition of philosophy, so that we conclude that the philosopher is he who knows all things,
even difficult ones, by means of certainty and cause, seeking knowledge for its own sake, ordering
and persuading others in the light of natural reason.
Keywords: Medieval philosophy; Theology; Metaphysics; love; wisdom.
