# Understanding Personhood and it's Relation to Other Matters



## Alex Suarez (Oct 20, 2015)

I am trying to think how the following relate: the person, the image of God (imago Dei), the soul, and the mind. 


Any thoughts? Or suggestions?



Kind regards,

Alex Suarez (OPC)
Miami, FL


----------



## MW (Oct 21, 2015)

Alex Suarez said:


> Any thoughts? Or suggestions?



Philosophically "soul" refers to the immaterial aspect of man when distinguished from the body. Ethically the soul is sometimes equivalent to the "life" of man. "Mind" would constitute the intelligent and rational power of the soul as distinct from other powers like "the will," although these powers always function as an integrated unity. The "person" would be the whole man, soul and body, immaterial and material, as an unity. The image of God in its broader view would take in the whole man, soul and body, with the image itself being seated in the spiritual nature of man; but in the more narrow view the image would be the upright quality of human nature as knowing and serving God with wisdom, righteousness, and holiness.


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 21, 2015)

Rev Winzer,

Would you hold to the scholastic view that the soul is a kind of continuum with the rational powers at the top and the appetitive powers at the bottom?


----------



## MW (Oct 22, 2015)

ReformedReidian said:


> Would you hold to the scholastic view that the soul is a kind of continuum with the rational powers at the top and the appetitive powers at the bottom?



It depends on whether that "continuum" supposes the soul and the powers are different things or the same thing. I hold the view that the powers are simply the soul itself doing the actions of reasoning, willing, desiring, etc.

The appetite is simply the effect of a rational soul willing what is good for itself (or at least what it thinks is good for itself), and was a necessary part of being an human and dependent creature made for eschatological blessedness in communion with God. When sin entered it corrupted man rationally and wilfully and thus perverted his appetites. Sometimes scholastics spoke as if sin created some kind of reversal in the psychological process, which meant the appetite drove reason, which is not philosophically possible and is Scripturally unsound.


----------



## TylerRay (Oct 23, 2015)

What is a good work on classical psychology, which deals with concepts like passions, affections, intellect, and will?

I hope I am not derailing the thread by asking that.


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 24, 2015)

TylerRay said:


> What is a good work on classical psychology, which deals with concepts like passions, affections, intellect, and will?
> 
> I hope I am not derailing the thread by asking that.



While I wouldn't endorse everything he says, you would find it helpful to read what Thomas Aquinas said--if only to familiarize yourself with the terminology. Then I would go with Thomas Reid. ALso Muller's Dictionary of Latin and Greek terms has some excellent discussions. Dallas Willard's _Renovation of the Heart_ takes most of the same concepts and applies them to modern language.


----------



## MW (Oct 25, 2015)

TylerRay said:


> What is a good work on classical psychology, which deals with concepts like passions, affections, intellect, and will?



Besides the works already recommended, see Shedd's Dogmatic Theology on Anthropology, especially the section on the Human Will, and his differentiation between the elder and younger psychology. That will give a good starting point. Basically any reformed theology dealing with the Will should provide helpful comments. One intramural discussion concerns whether the will or the understanding is primary. Although this is a little complex, and perhaps even redundant, the discussion itself is worthwhile in the way it brings out the interconnection.

Reid, or any other older realist philosophy dealing with the powers of the mind, is useful. I would highlight Thomas Brown as one who showed the unity of these powers.


----------

