Medieval Philosophy

by Peter S. Adamson

But we need to be careful here. All the talk of unchanging objects may lead us to think that the divine exemplars are the very things we know, insofar as we get to know anything. As I’ve already said, though, Bonaventure insists otherwise. In the “response” at the center of the disputed question, he explains that we never know the divine exemplars, at least not in this life. Rather, we know created things as images of the exemplars. The talk of “illumination” is not meant to suggest that we are beholding God’s ideas like lights flashing in our mind’s eye. Rather we are knowing about created things in the light of the exemplars. The metaphor does not have God playing the role of a brilliant lamp into which we are staring, but of a lamp that is making other things visible so that we can see them. Bonaventure describes it with somewhat less metaphorical (but not entirely literal) language by saying that the exemplars serve as rules or standards (regulae) for the things we know (134). When we know that giraffes are ruminants, it’s as if we are implicitly comparing created giraffes to the divine idea of a giraffe, with the comparison allowing for certain knowledge rather than mere belief. The exemplars provide a perfect standard in the light of which we can judge. But something else is needed too. We must enjoy an encounter with some actual created giraffes, or there will be nothing for the divine light to illuminate. To this extent, like Grosseteste before him, Bonaventure cou...