Non est fides, sed scientia. Eternidad del mundo y “doble verdad” en Boecio de Dacia y Nicolás de Autrecourt

Abstract

This research sets to compare two medieval treatises dealing with one of the problems in which the tension between revealed truth and rational research in nature is stronger: the question of the eternity of the world. The texts dealt with are Boethius of Dacia’s De aeternitate mundi and Nicholas of Autrecourt’s
Exigit ordo, both of which were involved in paths condemned by the ecclesiastical authorities, in 1277 and 1346 respectively. While Boethius’ treatise owes much to the assimilation of the Aristotelian corpus in the XIII century, Nicholas de Autrecourt’s work presents itself as an attempt to go beyond the model of research of nature developed by Aristotle and systematized by Scholastics. Thus, the comparison will not deal with arguments, which are diverse in both authors as they were inspired by different models. Rather, the comparison will focus on the relationship between the argumentation and the contents of faith, in so far as, and despite the different answers given to this matter, the authors keep a clear separation between the realm of reason and revelation to avoid conflict between these two opposing “truths”.