God and Philosophy, Second edition [Paperback]

Etienne Gilson (Author)

Book Description

Series: Nota Bene | Publication Date: March 1, 2002

In this classic work, the eminent Catholic philosopher Etienne Gilson deals with one of the most important and perplexing metaphysical problems: the relation between our notion of God and demonstrations of his existence. Gilson examines Greek, Christian, and modern philosophy as well as the thinking that has grown out of our age of science in this fundamental analysis of the problem of God.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"I commend to another generation of seekers and students this deeply earnest and yet wistfully gentle little essay on the most important (and often, at least nowadays, the most neglected) of all metaphysical and existential questions... The historical sweep is breathtaking, the one-liners arresting, and the style, both intellectual and literary, altogether engaging." Jaroslav Pelikan, from the foreword "We have come to expect from the pen of M. Gilson not only an accurate exposition of the thought of the great philosophers, ancient and modern, but what is of much more importance and of greater interest, a keen and sympathetic insight into the reasons for that thought. The present volume does not fail to fulfill our expectations. It should be read by every Christian thinker." Ralph O. Dates, America

From the Back Cover

"[I] commend to another generation of seekers and students this deeply earnest and yet wistfully gentle little essay on the most important (and often, at least nowadays, the most neglected) of all metaphysical—and existential—questions. . . . The historical sweep is breathtaking, the one-liners arresting, and the style, both intellectual and literary, altogether engaging."—Jaroslav Pelikan, from the foreword REVIEW "We have come to expect from the pen of M. Gilson not only an accurate exposition of the thought of the great philosophers, ancient and modern, but what is of much more importance and of greater interest, a keen and sympathetic insight into the reasons for that thought. The present volume does not fail to fulfill our expectations. It should be read by every Christian thinker."—Ralph O. Dates, America:

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 176 pages
• Publisher: Yale University Press; 2 edition (March 1, 2002)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0300092997
• ISBN-13: 978-0300092998
• Product Dimensions: 7.7 x 5 x 0.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 4.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (9 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #138,658 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

42 of 46 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Still one of the best introductions, July 3, 2000

By 

Patrick A Daley (Fredericton, New Brunswick) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: God and Philosophy (The Powell Lectures Series) (Paperback)

Thales of Miletus, whom tradition regards as the first Western philosopher, is well-known for the rationalist view that the first principle is water, and the religious statement, "all things are full of gods." (p. 1) For Gilson, this epitomizes the problems of relating philosophy and religion. How can religious and philosophical statements about God be reconciled? For Thales and the Greeks, Gilson argues that they cannot, but that it is otherwise with the Christian philosophies of Being.

On this basis, rejects the view that Greek philosophy is a rationalization of a religious viewpoint, apparently on the basis that one cannot interpret a world of personal forces in terms of things. However, F. M Cornford and others argued persuasively for the opposite view, and seem to have in great part won the battle. For example, the classic study of the presocratic philosophers by Kirk, Raven, and Schofield, as well as anthologies by Wheelwright and Barnes, begin with a consideration of their religious and mythological predecessors. So, it does not seem one can understand the origin of Greek philosophy without considering Greek religion.

How well does Gilson understand Greek religion? Is it true that "A world where everything comes from without, including their feelings and passions, their virtues and vices, such was the Greek religious world." (p. 13) As E. R. Dodds has pointed out, this did not seem to deprive them of a sense of responsibility. Before criticizing Gilson too strongly, we should remember that God and Philosophy originates in the Mahlon Powell Lectures on Philosophy at Indiana University in 1938-1939, and that Greek thought and religion are not really his specialty. Historical details aside, Gilson always raises pertinent questions.

Gilson aptly states the philosophical problem of God not only for the Greeks, but philosophers generally: "how to identify their principles with their gods, or their gods with their principles." (p. 22) Christian thought concerning the nature of God owes much to Plato's Form of the Good, Aristotle's Unmoved Mover or Self-Thinking Thought, and Plotinus' One, but it is difficult to give them a full religious value, although I cannot agree they have none at all. I may say that Gilson provides a marvelously condensed account of Plotinus' philosophy of the One which may well be basically correct. (Pp. 45-50)

For Gilson, the Greek essentialist philosophies could not help but consider God as a thing. When it comes to Christian philosophies of Being (a controverted subject), Gilson argues that the philosophical God and the religious God can be the same Being. This is a very attractive position considered in itself. I think. But, his historical analysis is less certain. It may be that many Christian thinkers have rendered the cryptic phrase for who God is in Exodus 3:1 as "He Who Is." This, however, has exegetical difficulties. Suffice it to point out that the New Revised Standard Version translates the phrase as "I AM WHO I AM," and offers two alternatives in the footnotes, "I AM WHAT I AM or I AM WHAT I WILL BE." So, while Gilson argues persuasively that religious thinkers such as Augustine and Aquinas, among numerous others, have interpreted this as meaning God is Being, it doubtful whether this a good exegesis of the text.

Gilson is one of the greatest Descartes scholars, but I must forgo discussing his insights in any detail. He cites O. Hamelin for the opinion that Descartes, the founder of modern philosophy, followed after the ancient philosophers as if nothing had happened in between. Gilson has very effectively attacked this view a number of times, especially as to his notion of God.

"Whatever his name, his rank, or his function, not one of the gods of Greek religion had ever claimed to be the one, sole, and supreme Being, creator of the world, first principle, and ultimate end of all things. Descartes, on the contrary, could not approach the same philosophical problem without finding himself confronted with the Christian God." (p. 79)

So Descartes' attempt to philosophize about God apart from religious revelation was doomed to failure from the start. Gilson argues that it is extremely difficult to philosophize about God apart from religious revelation, simply because philosophers must have some pre-philosophical idea of God in the first place. The God of the philosophers generally becomes a thing, a philosophical principle.

Frankly, after Descartes, the book becomes somewhat disjointed, filled with brilliant insights though it may be. I will mention Spinoza, who wished "to achieve salvation by means of philosophy only." His brand of salvation is really available, at best, to a select few, who can understand nature "as an absolutely intelligible reality." In passing, he discusses such varied thinkers as Pascal, Malebranche, Leibniz, Kant, Comte, English and French Deists, Sir James Jeans, who gets several pages, and Julian Huxley. One must remember that the book originated in a lecture series, which must have been brilliant.

Gilson quite sensibly holds that religion is existential, that it concerns our lives. It is not how the universe works, but why, and the ultimate why is, in Leibniz's formulation: why is there something rather than nothing?

"To this supreme question, the only conceivable answer is that each and every particular existential energy, each and every particular thing, depends for its existence on a pure Act of existence."

Gilson goes on to argue that this pure Act must be self-subsistent, knowing, and free, and hence, a person.

Ninian Smart, who qualified both in the history of religions and analytic philosophy, has argued forcefully that too many philosophers who discuss religion know very little about the history of religion. Gilson, however, really knew quite a lot about religion, and his position is quite attractive. Though many of his historical interpretations are debatable, with Gilson's philosophical and literary acumen, God and Philosophy remains one of the best introductions to many of the themes of the philosophy of religion.

14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars An excellent beginner in the study of philosophy!, June 29, 2004

By 

"bighart" (Houston, Texas USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: God and Philosophy, Second edition (Paperback)

Gilson's book is simply a masterpiece! The brilliance of this work is shown in its clarity and simplicity of thought and development of philosophy from the ancient Greeks on. Too often philosophy reads these days have become complex and frustrating, but not with Gilson. A true Christian philosopher, it is unfortunate that a reader might think this work concludes with the idea that "God is dead." This is not the intent of Gilson at all; rather, that of the exact opposite! Find out for yourself...

5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent short summary of the entire history of philosophy, June 4, 2008

By 

Aquinas "summa" (celestial heights, UK) - See all my reviews

This review is from: God and Philosophy, Second edition (Paperback)

Gilson brilliantly demonstrates that God's description of himself as "I AM who AM", in revelation to Moses and the Jewish people, is the foundation of western metaphysics - it is the decisive answer to the Greek's search for meaning. It was in this decisive encounter between God and his people that God showed himself to be pure Act.

"Existence is not a thing, but the act that causes a thing both to be and to be what it is. This distinction merely expresses the fact that, in our human expericence, there is no thing whose essence it is "to be" and not "to be a certain thing thing....Since the nature of no one of them (things) is "to be", the most exhaustive scientific knowledge of what they are will not so much as suggest the beginning of an answer to the question: "Why are they"? "If the nature of no known thing is "to be", the nature of no known thing contains in itself the suffient reason for its own existence. But it points to a sole conceivable cause...there must be some cause whose very essence it is "to be". To post such a being whose essence is pure Act of existing, that is, whose essence is not to be this and that but "to be" is also to post the Christian God as the supreme cause of the universe". (page 70-72).

"The true reason why this universe appears to some scienitist as mysterious is that, mistaking existential, that is, metaphysical, questions for scientific ones, they ask science to answer them. Naturally, they get no answers. Then they are puzzled, and they say that the universe is mysterious" (page 128)

For Gilson, Scientists "prefer a complete absence of intelligibilty to the presence of a non-scientific intelligibility"

"Much more common, unfortuantely, are those pseudo-agnostics who, because they combine scientific knowledge and social generosity with a complete lack of philosophical culture, substitute dangerous mythologies (progress, for example, my inference!) for the natural theology which they do not even understand (page 137). This sounds like a remarkable forewarning of what is happening in our culture where science and progress are elevated to the pantheon of the gods. Witness the complete lack of meaningful debate in the UK concering the creation of saviour siblings and human-animal hybrids for experimentation, the latter being put forward simply because there may be some benefits and hence possibly some scientific benefits.

Finally, the question which must always and everywhere be asked is "Why is there something rather than nothing"? (page 188).