DOCSLIB.ORG

Roger Bacon on Experiment, Induction and Intellect in His Reception of Analytica Posteriora Ii 19

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Roger Bacon on Experiment, Induction and Intellect in His Reception of Analytica Posteriora Ii 19 ROGER BACON ON EXPERIMENT, INDUCTION AND INTELLECT IN HIS RECEPTION OF ANALYTICA POSTERIORA II 19 Pia A. Antolic-Piper* Nowadays it is commonly acknowledged among scholars that the Cor- pus Aristotelicum had a huge influence on Latin medieval thinkers. It is equally agreed upon that the reception of the Aristotelian writings had ahistoricalpoint de départ when, in the middle of the twelfth century, translators like James of Venice (Jacobus Veneticus Graecus) or Gerard of Cremona undertook the task of translating Aristotelian texts from Greek and Arabic, which were at the time unknown to the Latin medievals. In this light, the twelfth and thirteenth centuries are characterized histori- cally by the translation and the reception of almost all Aristotelian works as well as other Arabic, Greek, and Jewish sources.1 The fortunes of the Stagirite’s doctrines on being qua being and natu- ral phenomena, on man and happiness, on language and knowledge were to become quite different. Unlike the reception of Physics, De anima and Metaphysics (Met.), Posterior Analytics (APo.) had no institutional resis- tance to overcome.2 By the middle of the thirteenth century, the Aris- totelian paradigm of scientia (epistêmê) as demonstrative knowledge of reasoned facts had entered the philosophical and theological discussion. In APo. had become an integrated part of the arts-curriculum at the University of Paris.3 Nevertheless, its readers have had their diffi- culties with Aristotle’s teaching on demonstration, universals, and prin- ciples. The sceptical remarks on the understanding and applicability of * I would like to thank Dr. Mark Thompson for his help in revising my English. 1 For the translators and the translations of the Aristotelian writings see: Dod (), –. 2 “Non legantur libri Aristotelis de methafisica et de naturali philosophiae, nec summe de eisdem, aut de doctrina magistri David de Dinant, aut Amalrici heretici, aut Mauricii hyspanii.” Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis (CUP), eds. Denifle & Chate- lain (), No. , f. For the bans in the th century against Aristotle’s work see: Van Steenberghen () and Miethke (). 3 The statutum artistarum nationis anglicanae and the statutum facultatis artium de modo docendi et regendi in artibus in: CUP I, No. , – and No. , –. pia a. antolic-piper APo.thatcanbefoundinJohnofSalisbury’sMetalogicon, a treatise from , perhaps best express the attitude and the difficulties of a whole gen- eration of scholars towards the Scientia demonstrativa:almostacentury had to pass until the first medieval scholar undertook the task of com- menting on APo.4 This diachrony in the translation and the reception of the Aristotelian writings extends over Posterior Analytics as well as Metaphysics and Physics. The finally fruitful integration of the ‘New Aris- totle’ was furthermore promoted and supported by the mediation of the newly translated Arabic tractates and commentaries on Aristotle, and the reverting to traditional Christian sources like Boethius.5 The emergence of these writings as textbooks marks a continuity, rather than a discon- tinuity, between the twelfth and thirteenth century, as well as a strong motivational and systematic continuity in regard to the development of logical and epistemological, metaphysical or psychological questions. Following the first translation of APo. into Latin (between –) by James of Venice, it took almost a century until the first scholar under- tookthetaskofcommentingonthistextbookofLogica nova as a whole.6 Although we find “echoes” of the Posterior Analytics in the reception of Sophistici Elenchi bytheendofthethcentury,7 it was to be the later Bishop of Lincoln, Robert Grosseteste (–), who first com- mented on APo. in the ’s in Oxford. By the end of the th century this literary commentary had advanced to a standard commentary.8 In the meantime we find more commentaries on APo.bymastersfromthe 4 “Posteriorum vero analecticorum subtilis quidem scientia est, et paucis ingeniis pervia. Quod quidem ex causis pluribus evenire perspicuum est. Continet enim artem demonstrandi, quae prae ceteris rationibus disserendi ardua est. Deinde haec utentium raritate iam fere in desuetudinem abiit, eo quod demonstrationis usu vix apud solos mathematicos est, et in his fere apud geometras dumtaxat.”John of Salisbury, Metalogicon, ed. Hall (), IV. , . 5 See Speer (), –. For the reception of the epistemological doctrines of Aris- totle in Dominicus Gundissalinus, a twelfth century author and translator, see Fidora (). 6 For the translatio Iacobi see: Minio-Paluello (), –; Dod (), – and the “Praefatio” in Minio-Paluell & Dod (), IX–LXXXIII. Unlike the translatio Iacobi the other two translations from the Greek by the mysterious translator Ioannes (before ) and William of Moerbeke (ca. or earlier) and the translation from the Arabic by Gerard of Cremona (before ) were rarely used. While the translatio Iacobi is extant in mss the other translations were far less circulated. 7 Ebbesen (), –. For the reception of APo. in the Middle Ages see Serene (), –; Pinborg (), –; and De Rijk (), –. 8 Robert Grosseteste, Commentarius in Posteriorum analyticorum libros, ed. Rossi (). See Ebbesen (), –; here: f..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Vocabulary of PHILOSOPHY Vocabulary of PHILOSOPHY Version 1.1 (Last Updated : Apr
    - Institute for scientific and technical information - Vocabulary of PHILOSOPHY Vocabulary of PHILOSOPHY Version 1.1 (Last updated : Apr. 05, 2018) This resource contains 4435 entries grouped into 89 collections. Controlled vocabulary used for indexing bibliographical records for the "Philosophy" FRANCIS database (1972-2015, http://pascal-francis.inist.fr/ ). This vocabulary is browsable online at: https://www.loterre.fr Legend • Syn: Synonym. • →: Corresponding Preferred Term. • FR: French Preferred Term. • DE: German Preferred Term. • SC: Semantic Category. • DO: Domain. • URI: Concept's URI (link to the online view). This resource is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license: LIST OF ENTRIES List of entries English French Page • 10th century Xe siècle 176 • 11th - 13th centuries XIe - XIIIe siècles 176 • 11th century XIe siècle 176 • 12th -13th centuries XIIe - XIIIe siècles 176 • 12th century XIIe siècle 176 • 13th - 14th centuries XIIIe - XIVe siècles 176 • 13th - 15th centuries XIIIe - XVe siècles 176 • 13th century XIIIe siècle 176 • 14th - 15th centuries XIVe - XVe siècles 176 • 14th - 16th centuries XIVe - XVIe siècles 176 • 14th - 17th centuries XIVe - XVIIe siècles 176 • 14th century XIVe siècle 176 • 15th - 17th centuries XVe - XVIIe siècles 176 • 15th century XVe siècle 176 • 1656-1658 1656-1658 176 • 16th - 17th centuries XVIe - XVIIe siècles 176 • 16th - 18th centuries XVIe - XVIIIe siècles 176 • 16th - 20th centuries XVIe - XXe siècles 176 • 16th century XVIe siècle 176 • 1735-1985 1735-1985
    [Show full text]
  • John Pecham on Life and Mind Caleb G
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2014 John Pecham on Life and Mind Caleb G. Colley University of South Carolina - Columbia Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Colley, C. G.(2014). John Pecham on Life and Mind. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/ 2743 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. JOHN PECHAM ON LIFE AND MIND by Caleb Glenn Colley ! Bachelor of Arts Freed-Hardeman !University, 2006 Bachelor of Science Freed-Hardeman !University, 2006 Master of Liberal Arts ! Faulkner University, 2009 ! ! Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina 2014 Accepted by: Jeremiah M.G. Hackett, Major Professor Jerald T. Wallulis, Committee Member Heike O. Sefrin-Weis, Committee Member Gordon A. Wilson, Committee Member Lacy Ford, Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! © Copyright by Caleb Glenn Colley, 2014 All Rights !Reserved. !ii ! ! ! ! DEDICATION To my parents, who have always encouraged and inspired me. Et sunt animae vestrae quasi mea. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !iii ! ! ! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A number of people have spent generous amounts of time and energy to assist in the preparation of this dissertation. Professor Girard J. Etzkorn, the editor of Pecham’s texts, is not listed as a committee member, but he read my manuscript in its early form and made many helpful suggestions.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Al-Farabi, Avicenna, and Averroes in Hebrew: Remarks on the Indirect Transmission of Arabic-Islamic Philosophy in Medieval Judaism
    3 Al-FArAbi, AvicennA, And Averroes in Hebrew: remArks on tHe indirect trAnsmission oF ArAbic-islAmic PHilosophy in medievAl JudAism James T. Robinson erhaps as early as the eighth century, in the Islamic East, the traditional Sanskrit tales about the Buddha’s enlightenment—about his recognition of his own mortality and training with an ascetic monk—were translated into Persian and Arabic. The Arabic version, entitled Bilawhar wa-Būdhāsaf, then served as Pthe basis for renderings into Georgian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and a long list of European vernacular languages.1 These renderings were, more often than not, not straightforward translations but adaptations, often introducing significant modifications into the frame narrative. The Greek version, for example, transformed Bilawhar—an ascetic teacher—into Barlaam, a saintly Christian monk, and his disciple Budasaf or Yudasaf—the Buddha—into Joasaph or Josaphat, a saintly Christian Neophyte.2 The Hebrew version is no less surprising than the Greek, when Bilawhar be- comes not a Jewish sage but a Neoplatonic philosopher, and his 1 For the Arabic and Persian versions, see D. Gimaret (1972); D. Gimaret (1971). See also S. M. Stern and S. Walzer (1971). For the Georgian and Greek versions, see: D. M. Lang (1957), idem (1966); John Damascene (1914). The Hebrew version was edited by A. M. Habermann (1951), with extensive apparatus and commentary. For the vernacular versions, see most recently the studies of the German and English versions: S. Calomino (1990); K. Ikegami (1999). 2 In fact, both Barlaam and Joasaph/Josaphat became Christian saints. 60 The Judeo-Christian-Islamic Heritage final lesson to his young disciple is not a lesson in religious prac- tice but an introduction to neoplatonic metaphysics, based on the Arabic versions of Plotinus—namely, that complex of texts associated with the Theology of Aristotle.3 This is one example of the indirect transmission of Greek and Arabic philosophy in medieval Judaism.
    [Show full text]
  • International Workshop 10–11 June 2021, 16.00–19.00 (Gmt+1)
    TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE — TRANSFER OF IDEAS — TRANSFER OF EXPERIENCES LATIN TRANSLATIONS OF GREEK TEXTS FROM THE 11TH TO THE 13TH CENTURY INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP 10–11 JUNE 2021, 16.00–19.00 (GMT+1) Organizers: Paraskevi Toma (University of Münster) Péter Bara (Hungarian Academy of Sciences) Realizing the fact that there are different factors that influence translations, we set the dynamics of linguistic and cultural exchange from Greek into Latin as the focus of our workshop. Even though the knowledge of Latin in Byzantium dropped notably after the sixth century, it was surrounded by Latin-speaking territories, while a multilingual community continued to exist in Italy. Furthermore, the Crusades strengthened the ties between the Eastern and Western Mediterranean, a fact that unavoidably entailed knowledge transfer from Greek into Latin. The workshop will examine translators as mediators of knowledge and translated texts as sources of direct as well as indirect/intertextual knowledge. Rich material can be found, for example, in the fields of theology, medicine, and law. As regards translators, we will discuss their educational background and literacy, their networks and social status, along with their (in many cases) multicultural identity. Regarding translated texts, we will explore their literary genre as part of contemporary political or religious dialogue, identify Greek linguistic variants that were adapted by the Latin language, and finally consider the impact of translators themselves on their translations. Further questions to be discussed during the workshop are: v Who commissioned translations and for what purpose? v Did the translators follow a particular translation technique or school? v What role did these persons play as interpreters and as translators? v How have translations of legal and religious texts been used in multilingual environments? v Did translations/interpretations affect political or religious decisions or even cause controversies? * Add MS 47674 (c.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael of Ephesus' Comments on Aristotle's De Memoria
    NATIONAL AND KAPODISTRIAN UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS NATIONAL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS Michael of Ephesus’ comments on Aristotle’s De memoria Graduate Programme in the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology Daphne Argyri Advisor: Katerina Ierodiakonou Athens 2016 ΔΙΠΛΩΜΑΤΙΚΗ ΕΡΓΑΣΙΑ Ονοματεπώνυμο: Δάφνη Αργύρη Μεταπτυχιακό πρόγραμμα: Ιστορία και Φιλοσοφία των Επιστημών και της Τεχνολογίας (ΙΦΕΤ) Α.Μ.: 004/13 Υπεύθυνη καθηγήτρια: Κατερίνα Ιεροδιακόνου Αναγνώστες: Βασίλης Καρασμάνης Παύλος Καλλιγάς i Τα σχόλια του Μιχαήλ Εφέσιου στο Περί μνήμης του Αριστοτέλη Στην πραγματεία του Περί μνήμης και αναμνήσεως ο Αριστοτέλης παρουσιάζει τη μνήμη ως βασικό στοιχείο της γνωστικής διαδικασίας, πολύ συγγενές με την αντίληψη. Πρόκειται για μια παθητική κατάσταση (ἕξις/πάθος, 449b25), δηλαδή για μια αποθήκη της ψυχής γεμάτη με εικόνες του παρελθόντος, που σε αντίθεση και συνέχεια του Πλάτωνα διακρίνεται εμφατικά από την σαφώς ενεργητική διαδικασία της ανάμνησης. Η ανάμνηση συνίσταται στη δυνατότητα ανάκλησης στο παρόν, εκουσίως ή ακουσίως, των εικόνων του παρελθόντος και ανήκει, σαν συλλογισμός (οἷον συλλογισμός τις, 453a10), στο μέρος της ψυχής που συνδέεται με την λογική ικανότητα του ανθρώπου. Το υπόμνημα του Μιχαήλ Εφέσιου (12ος αι. μ.Χ.) στο παραπάνω έργο του Αριστοτέλη (Σχόλια εἰς τὸ Περὶ μνήμης καὶ ἀναμνήσεως, 1-41) είναι το μόνο υπόμνημα σε αυτό που σώζεται ως τις μέρες μας και αποτελεί πολύ σημαντική πηγή για την ιστορία των δύο αυτών εννοιών. Οι οξυδερκείς παρατηρήσεις και τα σχόλια του Μιχαήλ φαίνεται κατ΄αρχάς πως έχουν επηρεαστεί από τις διάφορες σχολές σκέψης με τις οποίες ήταν εξοικειωμένος, αλλά παράλληλα εκφράζουν ξεκάθαρα και τις προσωπικές του αντιλήψεις πάνω στο θέμα. Συγκεκριμένα, φανερώνεται μια συγκροτημένη θεώρηση της μνήμης και της ανάμνησης καθώς και του τρόπου με τον οποίο σχετίζονται και αλληλεπιδρούν στο πλαίσιο μιας συστηματικής γνωστικής θεωρίας.
    [Show full text]
  • Trans. Greek Thot Handout
    11/14/19 TRANSMISSION OF GREEK THOUGHT TO THE WEST PLATO & NEOPLATONISM Chalcidius (late 3rd-early 4th cent. Christian exegete): incomplete translation & commentary of Timeaus Henricus Aristippus in Sicily (12th c.): translated the Meno and Phaedo Leonardo Bruni (c. 1370-1444/Florence) translated a selection of Plato’s dialogues (from Greek to Latin). Marsilio Ficino (1433-1499/Florence): 1st complete translation into Latin of Plato’s works (publ. 1496), and translation of Plotinus’s Enneads into Latin (1492). Neoplatonic thought was transmitted in the following: (a) Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophy (written 524, in prison) (b) Macrobius’ Commentary on Cicero’s Dream of Scipio (written c. 400 CE). (c) Pseudo-Dionysius. A collection of writings attributed to Dionysius the Aeropagite (see Acts 17:34), but 19th century scholarship determined to be written c. 500 by a disciple of Proclus, held considerable authority throughout the middle ages and was a Christian Neoplatonism. (d) Theologica Aristotelis: this summary of Books 4-6 of Plotinus’s Enneads had been wrongly attributed to Aristotle (until 13th century) (e) Liber de Causis: this work based on Proclus’s Elements of Theology was wrongly attributed to Aristotle (until 13th century). ARISTOTLE Victorinus (4th century): Latin translations of Aristotle’s Categories and De interpretatione, as well as of Porphyry’s Isagoge. Boethius (470-524/Padua?): translated the entire Organon and wrote commentaries on all but the Posterior Analytics), as well as a translation of Porphyry’s introduction (Isagoge) to the Categories, but only De Interp. and Categories were readily available until 12th century. James of Venice (c.1128): translated Posterior Analytics; with the rediscovery of other translations by Boethius, this completed the Organon.
    [Show full text]
  • DEMONSTRATION and Scientific KNOWLEDGE in WILLIAM OF
    Longeway-000.FM 11/8/06 2:29 PM Page iii Demonstration and Scientific knowledge in william of ockham ATranslation of Summa Logicae III-II: De Syllogismo Demonstrativo, and Selections from the Prologue to the Ordinatio JO HN LEE LO NGEWAY University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame, Indiana © 2007 University of Notre Dame Press Longeway-000.FM 11/8/06 2:29 PM Page iv Copyright © 2007 by University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 www.undpress.nd.edu All Rights Reserved Manufactured in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Longeway, John. Demonstration and scientific knowledge in William of Ockham : a translation of Summa Logicae III-II : De Syllogismo Demonstrativo, and selections from the Prologue to the Ordinatio / John Lee Longeway. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn-13: 978-0-268-03378-1 (cloth : alk. paper) isbn-10: 0-268-03378-1 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Knowledge, Theory of. 2. Science —Methodology. 3. Logic. 4. Aristotle. Posterior analytics. 5. William, of Ockham, ca. 1285– ca. 1349. Summa logicae. 6.William, of Ockham, ca. 1285– ca. 1349. I. Title. bd161.l66 2006 160 —dc22 2006032380 ∞This book is printed on acid-free paper. © 2007 University of Notre Dame Press Longeway-01.Intro 11/8/06 2:28 PM Page 1 introduction The medievalist needs no convincing that William of Ockham (ca. 1285–1347) is worthy of study. At one time Ockham’s views might have been regarded as a clever but uninstructed sign of the decay of Scholastic discourse, but, with the work of such scholars as Philotheus Boehner, Ernest Moody, and Marilyn McCord Adams, those days are now receding into the past.
    [Show full text]
  • The Point Mass As a Model for Epistemic Representation
    Dipartimento di Scienze Pure e Applicate Corso di Dottorato di Ricerca in Scienze di Base e Applicazioni Ph.D. Thesis THE POINT MASS AS A MODEL FOR EPISTEMIC REPRESENTATION. A HISTORICAL & EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACH Tutor: Candidate: Chiar.mo Prof. Vincenzo Fano Dott.ssa Antonella Foligno Curriculum Scienze della Complessità Ciclo XXX – A. A. 2016/2017 Settore Scientifico Disciplinare: M-FIL/02 To Martina and Giada If our highly pointed Triangles of the Soldier class are formidable, it may be readily inferred that far more formidable are our Women. For, if a Soldier is a wedge, a Woman is a needle; being, so to speak, all point, at least at the two extremities. Add to this the power of making herself practically invisible at will, and you will perceive that a Female, in Flatland, is a creature by no means to be trifled with. But here, perhaps, some of my younger Readers may ask how a woman in Flatland can make herself invisible. This ought, I think, to be apparent without any explanation. However, a few words will make it clear to the most unreflecting. Place a needle on the table. Then, with your eye on the level of the table, look at it side-ways, and you see the whole length of it; but look at it end-ways, and you see nothing but a point, it has become practically invisible. Just so is it with one of our Women. When her side is turned towards us, we see her as a straight line; when the end containing her eye or mouth – for with us these two organs are identical – is the part that meets our eye, then we see nothing but a highly lustrous point; but when the back is presented to our view, then – being only sublustrous, and, indeed, almost as dim as an inanimate object – her hinder extremity serves her as a kind of Invisible Cap.
    [Show full text]
  • Boethius: Editions and English Translations
    Boethius: Editions and English Translations https://www.historyoflogic.com/biblio/boethius-editions.htm History of Logic from Aristotle to Gödel by Raul Corazzon | e-mail: [email protected] The Works of Boethius. Editions and English Translations BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDES ABOUT THE PHILOSOPHY OF BOETHIUS 1. Luca Obertello. Severino Boezio. Genova: Accademia Ligure di Scienze e Lettere 1974. Vol. II: Bibliografia boeziana. Bibliografia generale pp. 323 2. Joachim Gruber. Boethius 1925-1998 in: Lustrum. Internationale Forschungsberichte aus deim Bereich des klassischen Altertums, 39, 1997 pp. 307-383 and 40, 1998 pp. 199-259 (see in particular the Section C. Schriften zur Logik pp. 353-373, 117 titles). 3. Christophe Erismann. Originalité et latinité de la philosophie de Boèce. Note bibliographique, Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie, 51, 2004 pp. 277–289. 4. John Marenbon, (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Boethius, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 311–339. 5. Joachim Gruber. Kommentar zu Boethius de Consolatione Philosophiae. Berlin: de Gruyter 2006. Second fully revised and extended edition (first edition 1978). Anhang. Systematische Literaturverzeichnis pp. 409-444. 6. Phillips, Philip Edward. "Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius: A Chronology and Selected Annotated Bibliography", in: A Companion to Boethius in the Middle Ages, edited by Noel Harold Kaylor, Jr., and Philip Edward Phillips, Leiden: Brill, 2012, pp. 551-589. For more information see: John Magee and John Marenbon, Appendix: Boethius' Works, in: John Marenbon (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Boethius, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 303-310. "This Appendix is designed as a user's guide to Boethius' works. It is divided according to the four main spheres of his activity - (A) mathematical subjects; (B) logic; (c) theology; (D) the Consolation - with additional sections on (E) lost works and (F) works sometimes misattributed to him.
    [Show full text]
  • NICOLA POLLONI Gundissalinus and Avicenna
    NICOLA POLLONI Gundissalinus and Avicenna : Some Remarks on an Intricate Philosophical Connection Dominicus Gundissalinus is a peculiar figure in the twelfth-century cultural landscape. Born in the Iberian Peninsula between 1115 and 1125, he received his philosophical education in Chartres possibly under Thierry of Chartres and William of Conches as many traces in his original productions indicate1. At least since 1148, Gundissalinus was archdeacon of Cuéllar, a village not far from Segovia, where supposedly he was resident until 11612. Then, he moved to Toledo, where he was based from 1162. This fact is to be linked to the presence, in the Castilian town, of the Jewish philosopher Abraham ibn Daud. As pointed out by Bertolacci3, Ibn Daud’s translation of the prologue to Avicenna’s Liber sufficientiae — i.e., the Kitāb al-Šifāʾ — is to be seen as an invitation to the Toledan archbishop, John II, to sponsor and support a series of translations into Latin of Avicenna’s work. As a result, Gundissalinus arrived in Toledo, his presence probably required there by the same archbishop with the purpose of collaborating with Ibn Daud on the ‘Avicenna project’, the first accomplishment of which was the Latin translation of Avicenna’s De anima, realized before 11664. 1 SISMEL. EDIZIONI DEL GALLUZZO Cf. N. HÄRING, Thierry of Chartres and Dominicus Gundissalinus, « Mediaeval Studies », 26, 1964, pp. 271-286 ; K. M. FREDBORG, The Latin Rhetorical Commentaries by Thierry of Chartres, Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, Toronto 1988 ; EAD., The Dependence of Petrus Helias’ Summa super Priscianum on William of Conches’ Glosae super Priscianum, « Cahiers de l’Institut du Moyen Âge grec et latin », 11, 1973, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • ARISTOTELIAN ETHICS in BYZANTIUM* York: George Braziller
    Linos G. BENAKIS Vahanian, G. (1965b, December 8). Swallowed Vahanian, G. (1966b). Theology and ‘The End UDC 1/14:17 up by Godlessness. The ChristianCen- of the Age of Religion’. (J. B. Metz, Linos G. BENAKIS tury, LXXXII(49), 1505-1507. Ed.) Concilium: Theology in the Age Vahanian, G. (1966a). No other God. New of Renewal, XVI, 99-110. ARISTOTELIAN ETHICS IN BYZANTIUM* York: George Braziller. Abstract This paper argues that research in the primary sources must precede the investigation of Byzan- tine philosophy. Two points are to be considered, on the one hand, the gathering of texts, and, on the other hand, the study of texts in relation to their sources. Thus the external evidence as well as the internal evidence of texts should be examined. In this double regard, the manuscripts containing Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics are considered. Their authors are Michael of Ephesos, Eustratios of Nicaea, “Anonymus”, Heliodoros of Prussa, Georgios Pachymeres, Michael Psellos, John Italos, Nikephoros Blemmydes, George Gemistos Plethon. Keywords: Byzantine philosophy, Aristotle’s Byzantine Commentators, Michael of Ephesos, Eustratios of Nicaea, “Anonymus”, Heliodoros of Prussa, Georgios Pachymeres, Michael Psellos, John Italos, Nikephoros Blemmydes, George Gemistos Plethon. This paper is primarily technical in nature. b. The study of texts in relation to their It will argue that when one begins to examine a sources. Namely, the identification of less investigated area of the field of Byzantine sources – distinguishing between instan- Philosophy, research in the primary sources ces of mere borrowing and instances of a must still precede every interpretative act and more critical incorporation of such sour- critical approach.
    [Show full text]
  • 19Chronology of Works in Aesthetics and Philosophy Of
    Chronology of 19 Works in Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art Darren Hudson Hick Notes on Selection This chronology, as with this Companion as a whole, focuses on those works that contribute to the Western tradition of aesthetics, and, beginning in the twentieth century, in the analytic current of thought within that tradition (as opposed to the Continental one). As with the history of Western philosophy in general, the study of philosophical problems in art and beauty dates back to the ancient period, and is infl uenced by the major philosophical and cultural move- ments through the centuries. Much of what survives from the ancient to the post-Hellenistic period does so in fragments or references. In cases where only fragments or references exist, and where dating these is especially problematic, the author or attributed author and (where available) his dates of birth and death are listed. Where works have not survived even as fragments, these are not listed. As well, much of what sur- vives up to the medieval period is diffi cult to date, and is at times of disputable attribution. In these cases, whatever information is available is listed. Aesthetics in the period between the ancients and the medievals tends to be dominated by adherence to Platonic, Aristotelian, and other theories rooted in the ancient period, and as such tends to be generally lacking in substantive the- oretical advancements. And while still heavily infl uenced by ancient thinking, works from the medieval period tend also to be heavily infl uenced by religious thinking, and so many issues pertaining to art and aesthetics are intertwined with issues of religion as “theological aesthetics.” Movements in art theory and aes- thetics in the Renaissance, meanwhile, were largely advanced by working artists, and so tend to be couched in observational or pedagogical approaches, rather than strictly theoretical ones.
    [Show full text]