The Via Negativa doesn’t accept that everyday words can be used to describe God because they apply human characteristics onto something/someone who is finite, and therefore not part of this world. But Aquinas says that we only have our everyday language to talk about God. Through the use of Analogy Aquinas believes that we can reach an understanding of what God is. He based his theory on these two analogous techniques.
- An analogy of proportion occurs when a word is employed to refer to a quality that a thing possesses in proportion to the kind of reality it possesses. E.g. dogs are loyal in the way in which dogs can be loyal, and humans are loyal in proportion to the loyalty of the human being. Similarly one can understand God as all powerful, as we have a human understanding of power. Although God is proportionally more powerful than humans, even though we do not have a full understanding of Gods power.
- An analogy of attribution. If God is the creator, then human qualities must be expected to come from divine qualities. If humans are ‘good’ then they receive their goodness from God. This would then suggest that we can move the human meaning ‘upwards,’ to apply it to God. Of cause we can also move them ‘downwards,’ e.g. that animal is friendly.
Dionysius would combat the analogy of attribution by saying that you cannot love God as two humans love each other, because God doesn’t have a body or an existence as humans know, so then you cannot move this ‘upwards,’ and apply It to God.
He would criticise the analogy of proportion through this statement. ‘God is beyond all Power.’ Through this statement Dionysius is saying that God is so great that we cannot have an understanding of just how powerful, intelligent etc he really is.
The only information we know about God is in the Bible, through attributes of God, such as God is just. However such knowledge is within limitations of human understanding, and is symbolic. But humans can be just to each other, so Dionysius then goes on to state that ‘God is beyond goodness,’ so then to keep that barrier between God and humans.
John Hick states that through Dionysius’ references to the Bible and linking the attributes that are shown to us about God like, God is good and God is just, shows Dionysius trying to take away the ineffability of God which Hick believes to be a vital part to the Divinity of God.
I feel that Dionysius’ criticisms are fatal to Aquinas’ analogical theory, because he totally eradicates the chances of there to be any understanding of God through analogy, by the statement, ‘God is beyond …’ This totally confirms the divinity of God, showing that God is beyond all human comprehension. This also answers Hicks criticism. If Dionysius states that God is beyond all human understanding then he is not taking away the ineffability of God..
