Medieval Philosophy

by Peter S. Adamson

Boethius’ solution to the conflict between reason and faith does allow for the kind of doublethink mentioned at the beginning of this chapter. Consider the geologist who is also a strict creationist. She might say that she isn’t really being inconsistent, but just taking two different points of view on the question of where the universe came from. During the week she pursues an answer using the tools of science, and on the weekend she accepts a wholly different explanation on the basis of faith. This may seem irrational; yet Boethius would say it is anything but. To the contrary, it makes space for the purely rational endeavor that is science. There is no conflict between reason and faith and, in fact, there cannot be such a conflict, since the philosopher readily admits that he is not speaking of what is the case “absolutely” but only of what follows from the principles of his science (52).10 The implicit message is that the bishop of Paris and the theology faculty should back off and let the arts masters get on with their business of expounding Aristotle, an autonomous enterprise with its own ground rules. It poses no threat to the faith, since faith involves stepping outside or rising above the discipline of rational science. Put this way, Boethius’ proposal doesn’t sound particularly shocking, and indeed it wasn’t. Consider one remark he makes: “When someone puts aside rational arguments, he immediately ceases to be a philosopher; philosophy does not rest on revelation...