Comparative Analysis of Theophan Prokopovych’s and Georgii Konyskyi’s Philosophy of Mind

Keywords: second scholasticism, Francisco Suárez, Rodrigo de Arriaga, individual entity, active intellect, passive intellect, sense


The article compares selected chapters devoted the problems of mind (anima) from two philosophical courses by Georgii Konyskyi, taught at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in 1747-1749 and 1749-1751 academic years. As Konyskyi taught his first course using verbatim Teofan Prokopovych’s philosophical course of 1706-08 academic years, the article compares the doctrines on mind by these two Mohylian authors. It also shows the evolution of Konyskyi’s views.

There are common elements between the philosophy of mind of Prokopovych and Konyskyi: their interpretations of Aristotle’s definition of the soul; the scholastic concept of the man as an integral mind-body entity; the problem of the unity and multiplicity of forms. It is shown that Prokopovych and Konsyskyi understood the three-level structure of a human soul in the same way as Francisco Suarez and Rodrigo de Arriaga.

However, there are some differences between these two Mohylian professors. They interpreted differently sensitive and intellectual cognition. Prokopovych upholds the scholastic doctrine of species. Konyskyi, in his second course, abandons this doctrine and defends the doctrine of impressiones. They are developed by the phantasmata – not received from objects. The impressions are modifications of animal spirits by direct or indirect impact of objects on senses of a human being or any other animated being. In the doctrine on intellectual powers, Prokopovych upholds the scholastic distinction between active and passive intellect. Konyskyirejects this common for scholastic tradition distinction and considers that passive intellect can do full-scale intellectual activity. The influence of Early Modern philosophy, especially Cartesianism, was the reason why Konyskyi changed his position.

Author Biography

Yaroslava Stratii, Institute of Philosophy of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (Kyiv)

PhD, senior researcher


Aguilera, J. de. (1722). Cursus philosophicus. Tomus tertius, continens tractatus de generatione et anima. Mantuae Carpetanorum: ex Typog. Nicolai Rodriguez Franco.

Arriaga, R. de. (1639). Curus philosophicus. Parisii: Apud Iacobum Quesnel.

Castellote Cubells, S. (1982). Die Anthropologie des Suarez. Beiträge zur spanischen Anthropologie des XVI. und XVII. Jahrhunderts. Freiburg, & München: Karl Alber.

Gadamer, H.-G. (1965). Wahrheit und Methode. Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik. Tübingen: Mohr.

Gilson, É. (1922). Le Thomism. Introduction au système de saint Thomas d’Aquin. Paris: Vrin.

Gilson, É. (1986). La philosophie au moyen âge: des origines patristiques à la fin du XIVe siècle. Paris: Payot.

Gilson, É. (1994). L'être et l'essence. Paris: Vrin.

Gizel, I. (2011). Opus totius philosophiae. Hoc opus est traditum in Collegio Mohilaeano Kiioviensi annis 1646 et 1647 (fragmenta). [In Latin et Ukrainian]. In I. Gizel, Selected works in 3 volumes (Vol. 2). (L. Dovga, M. Symchych, & Ya. Stratii, Eds.). Kyiv, & Lviv: Svichado.

Kessler, E. (1995). Aristoteles latine: interpretibus variis. München: Wilhelm Fink.

Klima, G. (Ed.). (2015). Medieval Philosophy. Texts and studies. Intentionality, cognition, and mental representation in medieval philosophy. New York: Fordham UP.

Konyskyi, G. (1747-49). Philosophia peripatetica juxta numerum quatuor facultatum quadirpartita. [Philosophical course]. The department of manuscripts (fonds 152, item 130). Russian State Library, Moscow.

Konyskyi, G. (1749-51). Philosophia juxta numerum quatuor facultatum… [Philosophical course]. The Institute of Manuscripts (fonds 301, Petrov’s Catalogue, item 51). VNLU, Kyiv.

Meldula, B. de, & Belluti, B. (1727). Tomus tertius: continens Disputationes ad mentem Scoti in Aristotelis Stagiritae libros: De anima; De generatione et corruptione; De coelo et metheoris. Venetiis: apud Nicolaum Pezzana.

Purchotius, E. (1751). Institutiones Philosophicae ad faciliorem veterum ac recentiorum Philosophorum lectionem comparatae. Opera, et Studio V. Cl. Edmundi Purchotii … Tomus primus, complectens Logicam et Metaphysicam. Patavii: Typis Seminarii apud Joannem Manfrѐ.

Salatowsky, S. (2006). De Anima. Die Rezeption der aristotelischen Psychologie im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert. Amsterdam, & Philadelphia: Grüner.

Shcherbatskyi, G. (1751(52)-1752(53)). Ad majorem Dei Ter Optimi Maximi gloriam quod felix faustumque sit proponentur institutiones ad feliciorem veterum ac recentiorum philosophorum lectionem comparatae… [Philos. cours]. IR NBUV (fonds 307, item 454п/1698). Kyiv.

Sousedik, S. (2009). Philosophie der Frühen Neuzeit in den böhmischen Ländern. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.

Spruit, L. (1994). Species intelligibilis: from perception to knowledge. Volume One, Classical roots and medieval discussions. Leiden, New York, & Köln: Brill.

Suárez, F. (1991). Commentaria una cum quaestionibus in libros Aristotelis «De anima». Madrid: Fundacion Xavier Zubiri.

Symchych, M. (2009). Philosophia rationalis at Kyiv Mohyla Academy. Comparative Analysis of Mohilean Courses of Logic at the End of 17th - the First Half of the 18th Centuries. [In Ukrainian]. Vinnytsia: O. Vlasuk.

Valverde, C. (2011, March 10). Antropologia Philosofica. [In Russian]. Retrieved December 15,2015, from

Vdovina, G. (2009). The language of the non-obvious. The doctrine of signs in the scholastic of the XVII century. [In Russian]. Moscow: Saint Thomas Institute of Philosophy, Theology and History Press.

Vries, J. de. (1980). Grundbegriffe der Scholastik. Darmstadt: Wiss. Buchgesellschaft.

Werner, K. (1861). Franz Suarez und die Scholastik der letzten Jahrhunderte. Regensburg: Manz.

Abstract views: 242
PDF Downloads: 167
How to Cite
Stratii, Y. (2018). Comparative Analysis of Theophan Prokopovych’s and Georgii Konyskyi’s Philosophy of Mind. Sententiae, 37(2), 20-48.


Download data is not yet available.