Maimonides's Skeptical Critique of a Divine Intellect, or the Curious Case of Guide I.68.
The philosophers' dictum in Maimonides's Guide of the Perplexed I.68 has been classically read as Maimonides's own opinion that God's intellect in act is identical to the intellecting subject in act and intellectum in act, no different from a human intellect in act. This reading of the chapter gener...
| Published in: | Journal of the History of Philosophy Vol. 64; no. 2; pp. 183 - 213 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Johns Hopkins University Press
Apr2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=193013990&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 193013990 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00225053 HPH jtl: Journal of the History of Philosophy issn: 00225053 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Apr2026 vid: 64 iid: 2 pid: 226 pub: Johns Hopkins University Press artinfo: ui: 193013990 10.1353/hph.2026.a986603 ppf: 183 ppct: 30 formats: tig: atl: Maimonides's Skeptical Critique of a Divine Intellect, or the Curious Case of Guide I.68. aug: au: Stern, Josef su: Intellect Maimonides, Moses, 1135-1204 Philosophical literature Philosophy of mind Ancient philosophy Theory of knowledge Skepticism Philosophy of religion Philosophers sug: subj: Intellect Maimonides, Moses, 1135-1204 Philosophical literature Philosophy of mind Ancient philosophy Theory of knowledge Skepticism Philosophy of religion Philosophers keyword: anthropomorphism attributes entelechy faculty God inseparability intellect negative representation skeptical unity ab: The philosophers' dictum in Maimonides's Guide of the Perplexed I.68 has been classically read as Maimonides's own opinion that God's intellect in act is identical to the intellecting subject in act and intellectum in act, no different from a human intellect in act. This reading of the chapter generates multiple puzzles and contradicts Maimonides's views elsewhere. I argue instead that the chapter is Maimonides's skeptical critique of the philosophers' (not his own) conception of God's intellect, that careful analysis shows that Maimonides presents four differences between the human and divine intellects, and that the divine intellect, unlike the human, is entirely unknowable. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y dt: @attributes: year: 2026 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|