Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Cf. In I Phys., lect. 3, n. 21; In Boeth. De Hebd., lect. 2, n. 24: id quod est, sive ens
Cf. In I Sent., d. 37, q. 1, a. 1, sol.
3
Primo in intellectu cadit ens(In I Metaphysicorum, lect. 2, n. 45); illud autem quod primo intellectus concipit
quasi notissimum () est ens(De Veritate, q. 1, a. 1).
4
Summa Theologiae, I, q. 16, a. 4, ad 2.
5
Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 94, a. 2. Cf. In IV Metaphys., lect. 6, n. 605: In prima autem operatione est aliquod
primum quod cadit in conceptione intellectus, scilicet hoc dico ens: nec aliquid hac operatione potest concipi, nisi
intelligatur ens.
6
For a basic explanation of Fabros position on the primum cognitum, see: C. FERRARO, Appunti di metafisica,
Lateran University Press, 2013, pp. 41-48. For Italian epistemologist Antonio Livi (Prato, 1938) on the immediate
synthetic apprehension of being (ens), see: A. LIVI, Metafisica e senso commune. Sullo statuto epistemologico della
filosofia prima, Casa Editrice Leonardo da Vinci, Rome, 2010, pp. 77-81.
7
C. FABRO, Tomismo e pensiero moderno, Lateran University Press, Rome, 1969, p. 355.
8
L. ROMERA, Pensar el ser. Anlisis del conocimiento del Actus essendi segn C. Fabro, Peter Lang, Bern,
1994, pp. 331-332 (Note: Translations into English of the Romera quotes are by Jason Mitchell).
2
Explaining how being (ens) is the first object of our intellectual knowledge, Romera
writes that, for Fabro, following the doctrine of St. Thomas, ens constitutes the absolutely first
object of our intellectual knowledge.9 The character of first is specified as a primum, not only
psychological, but also critical-ontological.10 Thus, we are dealing with a first not only in the
analytical order, in the sense that analyzing any object one ultimately finds the notion of ens; but
also of a first, both on the psychological plane since it is the first that comes to our intellect, it
is the unveiling and awakening of our mind11 and on the critical-ontological plane, since it is
the fundament to which the critical problem remits and the basis of openness of the mind to
reality, on which the metaphysical problem is sustained and has meaning.12
Concerning how, for Fabro, the apprehension of being (ens) is immediate and synthetic,
Jason Mitchell notes that Fabro explains in Problematica del tomismo di scuola (1983), that the
first object of intellectual knowledge refers to knowing things that are in act. To this
corresponds, not a simple abstraction according to the essence, but rather a synthetic
apprehension according to the act of being. This is an apprehension since it is something
immediate and of an intellectual nature; it is synthetic since it embraces both act and content. It is
something vague in the beginning, yet becomes clearer according to the psychic development of
the subject.1314
With regard to the anti-formalistic gnoseological thought of Fabro pertaining to the
formation of the primum cognitum, Romera explains that, for Fabro, because it is the first
knowledge and by making reference to the real as real and to the act that this has, the primum
cognitum is not an abstract notion situated next to other abstract essences. Nor does it
correspond to judgment. The grasping of ens is neither an abstraction, nor an intuition; it is rather
a simple and synthetic apprehension (of content and act) which is had thanks to the primary and
constitutive convergence of the sensible and the intelligible. It is an intellectual apprehension,
prepared for by the experimentum, made by the intellect in the act of perceiving the singular.15
Concerning Fabros treatment of the role of perception in the formation of the primum
cognitum, Mitchell writes that in Chapter Six of his book, Romera takes into consideration the
role of perception: The apprehension of ens consists in grasping ens-esse thanks to the
convergence had between the sensitive and the intellectual spheres due to mans substantial
unity.16 The relationship between the perceptive act and the immediate, synthetic apprehension is
dealt with in Percezione e pensiero, which indicates that the primary knowledge of ens is
prepared by the senses by means of experimentum, the operation of experience by means of
See: C. FABRO, Problematica del tomismo di scuola, Rivista di Filosofia Neoscolastica, 75 (1983), p. 198.
See: C. FABRO, Partecipazione e causalit, Opere Complete 11, Editrice del Verbo Incarnato, Segni, 2010, p.
173.
11
See: C. FABRO, Nozione metafisica di partecipazione secondo san Tommaso dAquino, Opere Complete 3,
Editrice del Verbo Incarnato, Segni 2005, p. 187.
12
L. ROMERA, op. cit., p. 135.
13
See: L. ROMERA, op. cit., p. 178.
14
J. MITCHELL, Being and Participation. The Method and Structure of Metaphysical Reflection According to
Cornelio Fabro, volume 2, Ateneo Pontificio Regina Apostolorum, Rome, 2012, p. 702.
15
L. ROMERA, op. cit., p. 332.
16
See: L. ROMERA, op. cit., p. 179.
10
which the intellect stays in direct contact with reality.17 In the perceptive act, the existence of
what we perceive is immediately given. It is not obtained by way of argumentation, but rather
due to the presence of what is known. According to Fabro, there is not a sic et simpliciter
intuition of the existence of the existent, but rather an immediate, perceptive persuasion of the
existence of the existent.18
In the primum cognitum we grasp both something and existing immediately, although in
a confused way. The interplay between the senses, experimentum, common sense, the cogitativa,
means that this grasping and knowledge of essence and existence is founded in sensible
knowledge.19 An important role is given to the conversio ad phantasmata due to its functional
continuity between the senses and understanding, in that it is by means of the conversio that our
understanding has knowledge of the singular, and this of the ratio entis.20 In Partecipazione e
causalit, Fabro specifies that the primum cognitum refers to an immediate experience of the
being of ens in act and not of esse as act. Here, our author, following his distinction between esse
in actu and esse ut actus, makes it clear that such experience is only of esse in actu and not of
esse ut actus.21 Esse, as act, is grasped in ens.2223
17