@article {12329, title = {Probl{\'e}my normat{\'\i}vneho vymedzenia vz{\v t}ahu filozofie a teol{\'o}gie u E. Stumpovej}, journal = {Filozofia}, volume = {72}, number = {3}, year = {2017}, pages = {173-180}, type = {State}, abstract = {In her article Athens and Jerusalem: The Relationship of Philosophy and Theology, Eleonore Stump answers the question of the relationship between philosophy and theology via considering both disciplines doctrinally. Stump sees the difference between them mainly in their goals. Philosophy seeks to build a body of knowledge characterized in terms of abstract universals (wisdom). Theology seeks to reach an insight into a concrete particular (God). In this article, I aim to show that normative definition of the relationship between philosophy and theology {\`a} la Stump fails. Firstly, it fails systematically because it misinterprets several aspects of these two disciplines. Secondly, it fails historically because it fails to cover historical exempla. In conclusion I propose a sketch of an alternative dynamic model that allows us to describe the historical changes of both disciplines, and trace the changes of their relationship through time.}, keywords = {(A)Historicity, Eleonore Stump, Normativity, Philosophy, Theology}, url = {http://www.klemens.sav.sk/fiusav/doc/filozofia/2017/3/173-180.pdf}, author = {Labuda, Pavol} }