Scholastic temporal ontology refers to the systematic study of time, duration, and temporal modes of existence as developed by medieval scholastic philosophers. Rooted in Aristotelian physics and enriched by Christian theological commitments, this tradition distinguishes between tempus (time), aevum (evitable), and aeternitas (eternity) as distinct ontological categories of duration and change.

Definition & Scope

At its core, scholastic temporal ontology addresses the question: How do different beings endure, and what does their mode of endurance reveal about their nature? Unlike modern physics, which treats time primarily as a measurable dimension or coordinate, the scholastic approach treats duration as an intrinsic property of being. The ontology of time is thus inseparable from metaphysics proper, particularly the study of substance, accident, and causality.

The tradition emerged as a synthesis of ancient Greek philosophy, late antique theology, and Islamic/Hebrew commentaries. It reached its mature form in the 13th century, primarily through the works of Thomas Aquinas, but exhibits significant variations in the schools of Franciscan, Scotist, and Ockhamist thought.

Historical Foundations

Aristotelian Origins

The foundational text is Aristotle’s Physics (Book IV, Chapter 10), where time (chronos or tempus) is defined as "the number of motion in respect of the before and after." Time is not an independent substance but a measure of change. This view directly influenced Boethius, who in De Consolatione Philosophiae introduced the distinction between God’s timeless eternity and the sequential flow of created time.

Augustinian Influence

Augustine’s Confessions (Book XI) contributed a psychological and theological dimension, arguing that past and future exist only as present traces in the mind (memoria, intentio). While scholastics generally rejected Augustinian subjectivism about time, they retained the insight that temporal awareness requires an ordering principle.

The Tripartite Division

The scholastic framework classifies duration into three ontological modes:

  • Tempus (Time): The measure of successive, mutable change. Bound to material substances and celestial motion.
  • Aevum (Evitable): A mode of duration applicable to immaterial yet changeable beings (angels, celestial intelligences). Characterized by simul et post (simultaneity with succession).
  • Aeternitas (Eternity): The complete, simultaneous, and perfect possession of limitless life. Applicable solely to God, with no succession or potentiality.
"Aevum is between eternity and time, for it belongs to creatures that have no succession in their being, but are subject to change in their operations." — Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I.105.1

The aevum concept is particularly significant, as it attempts to resolve the metaphysical puzzle of how purely immaterial substances could undergo any change at all without being subject to material corruption.

Key Figures & Debates

Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274)

Aquinas systematized the tripartite division in the Summa Theologica and Summa contra Gentiles. He argued that angels exist in aevum because their being is immutable, but their operations (knowledge, will) are successive. For Aquinas, time requires matter; eternity requires immutability; aevum bridges the two for intermediate substances.

Duns Scotus (1266–1308)

Scotus challenged Aquinas’s strict correlation between matter and time. He proposed that pure spirits could theoretically exist in time if willed by God, emphasizing divine freedom over metaphysical necessity. Scotus also refined the concept of duration as a formal mode of being, separating it more clearly from change itself.

William of Ockham (1287–1347)

Ockham radicalized the discussion by reducing temporal ontology to nominalist terms. He argued that tempus and aevum are not real entities but conceptual distinctions based on how we perceive succession. For Ockham, only the present moment truly exists; past and future are mental constructs.

Metaphysical Implications

Scholastic temporal ontology has profound implications for:

  • Causality: If causes and effects exist in different temporal modes, how can causal interaction occur? Aquinas resolves this through the distinction between efficient and final causality.
  • Divine Foreknowledge: Eternity allows God to know temporal events without being temporally determined by them, preserving both providence and free will.
  • Immortality & The Soul: The human soul’s endurance post-mortem was debated in terms of aevum vs tempus, influencing doctrines of the intermediate state and the resurrection.

Contemporary Relevance

Though largely displaced by Newtonian and relativistic physics, scholastic temporal ontology has experienced renewed interest in analytic philosophy of time, philosophy of religion, and digital ontology. Key areas of cross-pollination include:

  • Block Universe vs. Presentism: Scotus’s defense of divine freedom anticipates modern presentist arguments against the B-theory of time.
  • Process Philosophy: Whitehead and Hartshorne engaged directly with scholastic distinctions when developing their metaphysics of becoming.
  • Computational Ontology: The tripartite model informs temporal reasoning in AI, particularly in modeling static knowledge bases (aevum) vs dynamic event streams (tempus).

Modern scholars continue to mine the tradition for insights into consciousness, temporal phenomenology, and the metaphysics of information.

References & Further Reading

  1. [1] Aquinas, T. (1265). Summa Theologica, I.105.1-6. Trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province.
  2. [2] Aristotle. (350 BCE). Physics, Book IV. Trans. R. Wicksteed & F. Cornford.
  3. [3] Boethius. (c. 524). De Consolatione Philosophiae, V.6.
  4. [4] Gracia, J. J. E. (2018). Aristotle’s Two Books on Nature: Physics and Generation and Corruption. Brill.
  5. [5] Kretzmann, N. (1980). "Aquinas on the Timelessness of Eternal Truths." In Time and the Nature of Eternity, pp. 75-96. Springer.
  6. [6] Ockham, W. (c. 1323). Ordinatio, I.5. Trans. G. Gál & A. J. Freddoso.
  7. [7] Pasnau, R. (2015). Scholastic Metaphysics: A Contemporary Introduction. Routledge.
  8. [8] Sorabji, R. (2006). Time, Creation and the Continuum: Theories in Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. Duckworth.