The article discusses the work of J. R. R. Tolkien in the context of the concept of hope as it is defined in the Thomist philosophical system. The thrust of the argument is that the distinction between the two meanings of the word: hope defined as an appetitive passion of the soul and hope understood as one of the theological virtues provides a viable conceptual key to a discussion of the way in which the idea of hope functions in J. R. R. Tolkien’s classic works of fantasy fiction. The analysis seeks to trace the evolution of this basic dichotomy throughout The Lord of the Rings and the most pertinent sections of the legendarium presenting how the notion of hope functions for the civilization of the Elves and of Men, and also how the interaction between the passion and the virtue of hope impacts upon the construction and function of some of the key the individual characters of Tolkien’s fiction.

This paper is an attempt to present the context and the essence of the dispute surrounding the understanding of theology as a science ( scientia) in the Aristotelian sense which took place at European universities in the13th-century. The aim of the text is also to indicate selected threads of the dispute, which also seem to be present in today’s metatheological and cultural discussions. Finally, the paper presents a brief presentation of the main strands of the solution to the dispute about the scientific character of theology as proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas’s metatheological proposal is presented owing to its completeness and coherence in addition to its inspiring and enduring character which perdures to the present day.

The article is an attempt to present the main reasons why the anthropological hylomorphism of St. Thomas Aquinas goes beyond the monism-dualism dichotomy in metaphysical anthropology. It cannot, as is most often done, be classified as a substance dualism of the Cartesian type. It is also not a position that can be included in the group of materialistic monisms, even of the non-reductionist type. Aquinas‘s anthropological hylomorphism seems to be a position that contains both the intuitions of materialistic and dualistic positions in metaphysical anthropology, although not reducible to either of them. On closer examination of positions such as Aquinas‘s anthropological hylomorphism, the question must arise whether the dichotomous and disjunctive division of positions in metaphysical anthropology into materialistic and dualistic is justified and operational.

Akratic actions are usually defined as intentional actions which conflict with the agent’s best judgement. As both irrational and conscious, actions of that type stand in need of an explanation. In this paper I reconstruct and criticize Donald Davidson’s classical standpoint on the problem of akrasia. I show the disadvantages of Davidsonian conception of practical reasoning and I defend the conception of syllogistic reasoning. I also criticize the theory of intention as unconditional normative judgement. Against Davidson’s view, I argue for the theory of intention as an act of will (not a judgement). According to this theory of intention and practical reasoning, akratic actions should be explained as actions caused by an act of will which conflicts with the best judgement. I propose to interpret the inclination of will to conflict or to follow the best judgement by the theory of habitus.

Today, there is a growing sense of the need to abandon philosophy or theology in favour of science and the convictions of specialists. The analyses presented by Aristotle and St Thomas in terms of the hierarchy of intellectual virtues allow us to draw attention to the conditions and consequences of these demands. In their view, knowledge grows out of certain principles and presuppositions, the evaluation of which belongs to the virtue of wisdom. The virtue of wisdom has as its object the highest principles, the reaching of which requires special methodological and metaphysical attention. In the case of Christian theology, this wisdom is enriched by faith in what God reveals to man. Faith understood in this way goes beyond natural cognition while at the same time having a strong rational basis of a historical and doctrinal nature. Scientific knowledge devoid of metaphysical reflection, as well as methodically dissociating itself from religious faith, can lead to a lack of awareness of one’s own act of faith in relation to one’s own presuppositions. This can entail unconscious transformations of one’s own scientific assumptions into principles of a universal philosophical nature. This can consequently lead to a misjudgement of all that is beyond the competence and methodology of the sciences.