Analysis Of Alan Darley's Essay

Alan Darley, in his article, Predication or Participation? What is the Nature of Aquinas’ Doctrine of Analogy, argues that the correct interpretation of analogy is a middle road between McInerny’s and Cajetans interpretation. He begins this discussion on whether the Thomistic doctrine of analogy is merely logical or also metaphysical. He seeks to do this using the two most predominant proponents for either of the views: Cajetan being the champion for metaphysical participation, and McInerny being the proponent of logical predication. Cajetan is said to argue in high favor of the metaphysical truth of analogy. Namely that as we can understand a Ship Captain is analogous to the Ruler of a City we can understand that a father is analogous to the Father. Montagnes seems to find this view unsatisfactory metaphysical and postulates that analogy is rooted in metaphysical participation and the analogy of being. Thus rooting an understanding of analogy is the metaphysics of participation. Mcinerny, seeing the metaphysical approach of Cajetan as a fall in the Thomistic tradition, argues for a more logic based expression of analogy. For him analogy is a way of speaking that places several things in relation to one thing, unequally. McInerny is seen to do this through the most commonly used example in the writing of
In the process of examining Cardinal Cajetan he shows the strengths of that approach. Then examines the weaknesses of Cajetan through his commentary on McInerny, while at the same time detailing the strengths of his more logic based approach to analogy. Then he details the weaknesses, while proposing his own synthesis to the two main approaches to analogy. This method resolves the issues of both while maintaining an integral unity to the thought of St. Thomas. Through Cajetan and McInerny he develops an interpretation that I appreciate very much. One in which analogical language signifies the analogical aspects of