DOCSLIB.ORG

Philoponus on Topos

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Philoponus on Topos Philoponus on τόπος. Redefining Place in Late Antiquity D i s s e r t a t i o n zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doctor philosophiae (Dr. phil.) eingereicht an der Philosophischen Fakultät I der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin und verteidigt am 25. October 2013 von Ioannis Papachristou Der Präsident der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Prof. Dr. Jan-Hendrik Olbertz Der Dekan der Philosophischen Fakultät I Prof. Michael Seadle, PhD Gutachter Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Christoph Helmig Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Christian Wildberg The dissertation attempts to interpret afresh, on the one hand, the form, methodology and structure of Philoponus’ commentary on the Physics and, on the other hand, to study in depth his theory of place (topos). The book extends over five chapters and includes a preface, an epilogue and a bibliography. Philoponus attempts a double determination of place. He distinguishes between the place which is void, three-dimensional extension that is ontological different from bodies, and the concept of place that is filled by bodies. Philoponus wishes to redefine the relationship between place and body and he underlines the ontological difference that a bodiless extension should have from a bodily extension. The thesis also focuses on Philoponus’ critique of Aristotle’s definition of place and the Peripatetic tradition (Eudemus, Themistius) regarding the place of the heavens. The book concludes that, Philoponus’ strategy in the digressions of the commentary, but also in certain parts of his exegeses, can be seen in three stages: first, he repudiates the cogency of Aristotle’s and Themistius’ critique to the concept of local extension; second, he attacks the Aristotelian definition of place by showing its weaknesses and inconsistencies with the nature of things; and third, he establishes his own theory of place. The result is a valuable set of arguments regarding place and a major contribution to the physics of late antiquity. Die Dissertation versucht einerseits die Form, die Methode und die Struktur von Philoponos Kommentar zur Physik neu zu interpretieren und andererseits seine Theorie des Ortes (Topos) eingehend zu untersuchen. Das Buch besteht aus fünf Kapiteln und es enthält ein Vorwort, einen Epilog und ein Literaturverzeichnis. Philoponus schlägt eine doppelte Ortsbestimmung vor. Er unterscheidet zwischen dem Ort, der leer ist, der dreidimensionalen Erweiterung, die sich ontologisch von Körpern unterscheidet, und dem Begriff des Ortes, der von Körpern erfüllt wird. Philoponos strebt danach die Beziehung zwischen dem Ort und dem Körper neu zu definieren und unterstreicht den ontologischen Unterschied, den eine körperlose Erweiterung von einer körperlichen Erweiterung haben sollte. Die Arbeit konzentriert sich auch auf Philoponos Kritik an der Definition von Ort laut Aristoteles und an der Peripatetischen Tradition (Eudemos, Themistios) bezüglich des Ortes des Himmels. Abschließend kommt das Buch zu dem Schluss, dass Philoponos Strategie sowohl in den Exkursen des Kommentars als auch in gewissen Teilen seiner Exegese in drei Stufen dargestellt werden kann: Er weist erstens die Gültigkeit der Kritik von Aristoteles und Themistios gegen das Konzept der lokalen Erweiterung zurück; zweitens greift er die aristotelische Definition des Ortes an, indem er seine Schwächen und Unstimmigkeiten mit der Natur der Dinge zeigt; und drittens stellt er seine eigene Theorie des Ortes dar. Das Ergebnis ist ein wertvolles Argumentarium über den Ort und ein wichtiger Beitrag für die Physik der Spätantike. 2 CONTENTS 5 ׀ Acknowledgements 6 ׀ Preface 14 ׀ CHAPTER 1 Form, Method and Structure of the Physics Commentary 14 ׀ The form of the Physics commentary 1.1 17 ׀ Dividing Aristotle’s Physics into lectures 1.2 23 ׀ A note on Vitelli’s edition 1.3 25 ׀ Defining corollarium and digressio 1.4 27 ׀ Corollaries and digressions in the Physics commentary 1.5 31 ׀ Levels of interpretation 1.6 35 ׀ The commentator and the truth 1.7 39 ׀ Introduction to the digressions .1.8 42 ׀ A note on Philoponus’ opponents in the digressions 1.9 44 ׀ The argument of the digressions 1.10 49 ׀ CHAPTER 2 Philoponus Defending Place as Extension 50 ׀ Aristotle’s rejection of place as extension 2.1 53 ׀ Themistius’ exegesis of Aristotle’s argument 2.2 56 ׀ Philoponus’ exegesis of Aristotle’s argument 2.3 59 ׀ Philoponus against the infinity of places 2.4 64 ׀ Philoponus against changing and coinciding places 2.5 70 ׀ CHAPTER 3 The Ontology of Place 70 ׀ Three-dimensionality of place 3.1 74 ׀ Place as measure 3.2 3 80 ׀ The empty universe 3.3 85 ׀ Place and the ‘violation’ of nature 3.4 94 ׀ Place, substance, qualities, and quantity 3.5 98 ׀ CHAPTER 4 The Voided Place 99 ׀ The concept of plērōsis 4.1 101 ׀ The definition of place as a voided extension 4.2 105 ׀ Natural bodies moving through void 4.3 117 ׀ Void as the necessary condition for locomotion 4.4 121 ׀ CHAPTER 5 Philoponus against the Aristotelian Definition of Place 122 ׀ Place as the limit of the containing body 5.1 125 ׀ Place in motion 5.2 131 ׀ A walk from Athens to Thebes 5.3 133 ׀ The place of the heavens 5.4 143 ׀ Epilogue 147 ׀ Bibliography 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The doctoral dissertation of which this book is a revised version was written within the framework of the Excellence Cluster Topoi “The Formation and Transformation of Space and Knowledge in Ancient Civilizations” during the period when I was a Doctoral Fellow of Topoi, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (2009-2012). I owe much to Topoi and the Graduate School of Ancient Philosophy (Humboldt-Universität) for their generous funding during my studies. I am grateful to the supervisors of this dissertation, namely Prof. Dr. Christoph Helmig (Universität zu Köln) and Prof. Dr. Christian Wildberg (Princeton University), for their assistance and advice throughout all these years. It has been a great pleasure to work under their supervision, since they repeatedly forced me to develop my thought with fresh insights. I also wish to thank Prof. Wildberg for the period I spent at Princeton University as Visiting Student Research Collaborator (November 2011-March 2012). In addition, I would like to thank my colleagues of the Topoi Research Group D-II-2 ‘Place, Space and Motion’; their work along with the lively academic atmosphere of our seminars always inspired me. I am indebted to Prof. Dr. Frans A. J. de Haas for hosting me at Leiden University (July 2012); I have greatly benefited from our conversations on final stages of my work. I would like to express my gratitude to Prof. Dr. Keimpe Algra, who trusted me with the translation of Philoponus’ commentary on the Physics, IV, 1-5 before its publication. I would also like to thank the director of Aristoteles Archiv (Berlin), Prof. Dr. Dieter Harlfinger, for giving me permission to work on the microfilms of Philoponus’ manuscripts. Of course, this dissertation could not have been completed without the constant encouragement, the spiritual generosity, and the friendship of Katerina Ierodiakonou, Anna Ntinti, Ervin Kondakçiu, and Christine. Finally, I could not forget Michael Frede, whose stimulating personality motivated me to exercise my mind thoroughly on ancient philosophical thought. I owe him much, but above all, in respect of this book, the fact that he mentored me to study Iōannēs Philoponus’ work. 5 Preface This is a philosophical study on the concept of τόπος (place) in Late Antiquity (6th century C.E.).1 The book centres on the theory of place held by a Christian theologian and commentator on Aristotle known as Ἰωάννης γραμματικός, φιλόπονος, Ἀλεξανδρεύς. His birth name, Iōannēs, indicates that the commentator was a Christian.2 He was given the last epithet because he is thought to have been born in Egyptian Alexandria in ca. 485 and certainly lived there up to 570.3 The epithet ‘grammatikos’ shows his early education as a grammarian or philologist and his intense interest in the field, as attested in his surviving grammatical works.4 Finally, the epithet ‘philoponos’ testifies to his character as a working scholar, for it signifies that Iōannēs was a lover of (spiritual) labour or toil. Iōannēs Philoponus was a member of the Platonic school of Alexandria when Ammonius (ca. 435/445–517/5265), the son of Hermeias (ca. 410–450), held its chair.6 We have one clue concerning Philoponus’ arrival at the philosophical school. Simplicius, who first attended the school at Alexandria under Ammonius and then left to join the Platonic school at Athens, reports that he never met Philoponus in the school of Alexandria; therefore we can assume that Philoponus joined the school shortly after Simplicius left Alexandria in ca. 510.7 Whether or not Philoponus succeeded Ammonius as head of the school is uncertain, but Philoponus’ philosophical association with the Platonic school lasted until his death. His surviving philosophical works show that he edited the lectures of his master Ammonius (commentaries). Despite these duties, Philoponus later continued working on Aristotle’s and 1 All dates, unless otherwise stated, are C.E. 2 Supporting monophysitism as indicated by his late theological work (after 551), Arbiter. See Lang 2001, pp. 40; 41-60. 3 Golitsis (2008, p. 7) places Philoponus’ birth around 485; Wildberg (2008a) believes that Philoponus was born around 490. See also Verrycken 2010, p. 733. 4 For instance, the De vocabulis quae diversum significatum exhibent secundum differentiam accentus. In addition, Simplicius attests that Philoponus signed himself as ‘grammarian’ (in De caelo, 119, 7). 5 For
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Paradigmatic Orientations of Mind Among Physicists
    ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 5 No 23 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy November 2014 Paradigmatic Orientations of Mind among Physicists Herman J. Pietersen Professor, University of Limpopo, Turfloop Campus 0727, Republic of South Africa [email protected] Doi:10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n23p2110 Abstract A meta-theory was developed that brought together implicit premises or world views that constantly re-surface in human thought. It consists of four paradigmatic or root intellectual orientations, designated as type I, type II, type III and type IV respectively. The theory was found to be applicable across a wide range of thinkers, scholarly disciplines, and cultures. In the current paper the framework is presented in terms of its main components and dynamics. The aim of the paper is to apply the meta-philosophical framework in identifying unique but complementary intellectual predispositions or modalities of mind among physicists. For this purpose a brief sketch of some prominent figures in physics is provided, showing their different orientations of mind. David Bohm represents the type I (metaphysical or objectivist-empyrean) tendency; Albert Einstein, the quintessential type II (scientific or objectivist-empiricist) approach; Carl Sagan is primarily the type III (subjectivist-empiricist) figure; whilst Fritjof Capra is the type IV (reforming or subjectivist-empyrean) representative in this group. Keywords: paradigmatic modalities of mind, Bohm, Einstein, Sagan, Capra 1. Introduction It is probably safe to say that in twentieth century science, as well as in the mind of the informed public, physics served and continues to serve as the ultimate reference point of exactitude in knowledge, and of what the human intellect is capable of achieving.
    [Show full text]
  • Projectile Motion Acc
    PHY1033C/HIS3931/IDH 3931 : Discovering Physics: The Universe and Humanity’s Place in It Fall 2016 Prof. Peter Hirschfeld, Physics Announcements • HW 1 due today; HW 2 posted, due Sept. 13 • Lab 1 today 2nd hour • Reading: Gregory Chs. 2,3 Wertheim (coursepack), Lindberg (coursepack) • HW/office hours 10:40 M,T, 11:45 W email/call to make appt. if these are bad Last time Improvements to Aristotle/Eudoxus Appolonius of Perga (~20 -190 BCE) : proposed: 1) eccentric orbits (planet goes in circle at const. speed, but Earth was off center) 2) epicycles (planet moves on own circle [epicycle] around a point that travels in another circle [deferent] around E. His model explained • variation in brightness of planets • changes in angular speed Ptolemy (AD 100 – c. 170): Almagest summarized ancient ideas about solar system. He himself proposed “equant point”: eccentric point about which planet moved with constant angular speed. Not true uniform circular motion, but explained data better. Ptolemaic universe (Equant point suppressed) • Note: this picture puts planets at a distance relative to Earth corresponding to our modern knowledge, but Ptolemaic system did not predict order of planets (or care!) • Exception: inner planets had to have orbits that kept them between Earth and Sun • Why epicycles? Not asked. Clicker quickies Q1: Ptolemy’s model explained retrograde motion of the planets. This means that A. Some planets moved clockwise while others moved counterclockwise along their orbits B. Some planets moved outside the plane of the ecliptic C. Some planets were observed to stop in the sky, move apparently backwards along their path, forward again D.
    [Show full text]
  • New Mathematics for Old Physics: the Case of Lattice Fluids Anouk Barberousse, Cyrille Imbert
    New mathematics for old physics: The case of lattice fluids Anouk Barberousse, Cyrille Imbert To cite this version: Anouk Barberousse, Cyrille Imbert. New mathematics for old physics: The case of lattice fluids. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, Elsevier, 2013, 44 (3), pp.231-241. 10.1016/j.shpsb.2013.03.003. halshs-00791435 HAL Id: halshs-00791435 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00791435 Submitted on 2 Sep 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. New Mathematics for Old Physics: The Case of Lattice Fluids AnoukBarberousse & CyrilleImbert ·Abstract We analyze the effects of the introduction of new mathematical tools on an old branch of physics by focusing on lattice fluids, which are cellular automata (CA)-based hydrodynamical models. We examine the nature of these discrete models, the type of novelty they bring about within scientific practice and the role they play in the field of fluid dynamics. We critically analyze Rohrlich', Keller's and Hughes' claims about CA-based models. We distinguish between different senses of the predicates “phenomenological” and “theoretical” for scientific models and argue that it is erroneous to conclude, as they do, that CA-based models are necessarily phenomenological in any sense of the term.
    [Show full text]
  • 375 A. Mark Smith A. Mark Smith's Lucidly Written Account of The
    book reviews Early Science and Medicine 21 (2016) 375-377 375 A. Mark Smith From Sight to Light: The Passage from Ancient to Modern Optics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2015), pp. 480, $45.00 (cloth), ISBN 978 02 261 7476 1. A. Mark Smith’s lucidly written account of the history of optics, from the an- cient world to the late seventeenth century, is comprehensive in scope and presents a radical break from the traditional narrative of the role medieval per- spectiva played in Johannes Kepler’s visual theory. Smith argues in a convinc- ing manner that while Kepler was clearly aware of perspectival sources, several elements of his thinking, and particularly his decision to accept the inverted retinal image as the principal means of sight, indicates a revolutionary turn away from the medieval tradition. This “Keplerian turn” had both analytic and epistemological elements, which Smith details at great length in his penulti- mate chapter. Smith characterizes his work as a “revamping” of David Lind- berg’s equally grand historical narrative Theories of Vision from Al-Kindi to Kepler, first published in 1976 (p. 4). In many ways this is an accurate assess- ment, barring Smith’s significant argumentative departure from the idea that Kepler relied on a firm grounding in perspectiva. Smith shifts his focus away from solely technical descriptions of optical theories, which can be found in Lindberg, and provides a much more inclusive history that treats the im- portance of psychological and theological texts in the development of perspec- tiva. Smith begins his narrative by exploring the earliest roots of perspectiva in the ancient sources, particularly Plato, Aristotle, Galen, Euclid, and Ptolemy.
    [Show full text]
  • Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy
    PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy by MICHAEL POLANYI London First published 1958 corrected edition 1962 by Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd © 1958, 1962 Michael Polanyi Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge's collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.” All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 0-203-44215-6 Master e-book ISBN ISBN 0-203-75039-X (Adobe e-Reader Format) ISBN 0-415-15149-X (Print Edition) To SIR THOMAS AND LADY TAYLOR PREFACE THIS is primarily an enquiry into the nature and justification of scientific knowledge. But my reconsideration of scientific knowledge leads on to a wide range of questions outside science. I start by rejecting the ideal of scientific detachment. In the exact sciences, this false ideal is perhaps harmless, for it is in fact disregarded there by scientists. But we shall see that it exercises a destructive influence in biology, psychology and sociology, and falsifies our whole outlook far beyond the domain of science. I want to establish an alternative ideal of knowledge, quite generally.
    [Show full text]
  • Scholasticism Old and New : an Introduction to Scholastic
    f^frrninnamvfuv^ii^ 3 1924 102 136 409 DATE DUE 1 i The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924102136409 SCHOLASTICISM OLD AND NEW Vetera Novis Augere. SCHOLASTICISM OLD AND NEW AN INTRODUCTION TO SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY MEDIEVAL AND MODEKN BY M. DE WULF DOCTOR OF LAWS, l.ciCTOR OF PHILOSOPHy AND LETTERS, PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF LOUVAIN TRANSLATED BY P. COFFEY, D.Ph. PROFESSOR UF PllILOSOPilV, MAISOOTH COLLtOB, IRELAND Jublin M H. GILL & SON, Lm LONGMANS, GREEN & 00. 39 PATBKNOSTEK EOW BOMBAV AND CALCUTTA. 1910 Printed and Bound in Ireland, ^3f ; PEEFATOEY NOTE. My object in translating Professor De Wulf's Introduction a la Philosophie Neo-scolastique has been fourfold : firstly, to give tlie advocates and supporters of " modern " systems of philosopby, as opposed " to scholasticism" —whether in its medieval or in its modern form—an opportunity of obtaining better and more authentic information about the latter system than books in English are usually found to contain ; secondly, to help students of scholastic philosophy to take in the main principles of schol- asticism in one connected view, and to equip them with a more accurate historical and critical appre- ciation of the system than they are ever hkely to derive from an unaided study of stereotyped manuals thirdly, to give aU Enghsh readers interested in philosophy of whatsoever kind an insight into the meaning, the spirit and the progress of the move- ment which has been developing during the last quarter of a century for the revival of scholastic philosophy ; fourthly, to prepare the way for trans- lations or adaptations of the Louvain Cours de philosophie, and to draw attention to the vahie of the work already done and hkely to be done in the well-known Belgian centre of the new scholasticism.
    [Show full text]
  • Intermediary Structural Analysis Force
    Intermediary Structural Analysis Force Victor E. Saouma [email protected] University of Colorado, Boulder Fall 2017 Victor E. Saouma; CVEN 4525/5525; Univ. of Colorado Introduction 1/12 Table of ContentsI 1 What is Force Aristotelian Medieval Newtonian Victor E. Saouma; CVEN 4525/5525; Univ. of Colorado Introduction 2/12 What is Force What is Force? Force is in general defined as the cause of acceleration. Since acceleration is observable, its cause must be something real. Thus, force is real. However, some physicists and philosophers of science have, pointed out that force does not exist in reality. Broadly speaking, we can distinguish two movements: Aristotelian (pre 17th century) Newtonian (17th century onward) may possibly add one “Einstenian”. Excellent reference Concept of Force by M. Jammer. Victor E. Saouma; CVEN 4525/5525; Univ. of Colorado Introduction 3/12 What is Force Aristotelian AristotelianI Aristotle (384 BC-322 BC), pupil of Plato, tutor of Alexander the Great, writings cover physics, biology, zoology, metaphysics, logic, ethics, aesthetics, poetry, theater, music, rhetoric, linguistics, politics and government and constitute the first comprehensive system of Western philosophy. Rather than assigning a “divine” explanation of nature, through observation he sought to discover the principles and causes of (and not merely to describe) and then developed systematic set of ideas by categorizing things: most famously believed that earth was made up of four main elements: earth, air, water, and fire. Likewise, he classified motion as either Natural associated with celestial motion (circular), or terrestial (rectilinear). Violent: Force responsible for motion had to be in constant physical contact with the moved body.
    [Show full text]
  • Form, Science, and Narrative in the Anthropocene
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Ghent University Academic Bibliography Form, Science, and Narrative in the Anthropocene Marco Caracciolo1 Ghent University [email protected] Rev. August 28, 2018 Please cite print article in Narrative 27 (3): 270–89 (October 2019). Keywords Nonhuman, New Formalism, Science and literature, Scale, Metaphor, Plot Abstract A significant strand of contemporary fiction engages with scientific models that highlight a constitutive interdependency between humanity and material realities such as the climate or the geological history of our planet. This article looks at the ways in which narrative may capture this human-nonhuman interrelation, which occupies the foreground of debates on the so-called Anthropocene. I argue that the formal dimension of scientific knowledge—as manifested by diagrams or metaphors used by scientists—is central to this narrative remediation. I explore two analogical strategies through which narrative may pursue a formal dialogue with science: clusters of metaphorical language and the global structuring of the plot. Rivka Galchen’s novel Atmospheric Disturbances (2008), for instance, builds on a visual representation of meteorological patterns in a storm (lifted from an actual scientific paper) to stage the narrator’s mental illness. Two other contemporary works (Orfeo by 1 The author’s work on this article was supported by the European Research Council, grant number 714166 (NARMESH). 1 Richard Powers and A Tale for the Time Being by Ruth Ozeki) integrate scientific models through the overall design of the plot. By offering close readings of these novels, I seek to expand work in the area of New Formalism and show how formal choices are crucial to bringing together the human-scale world and more-than-human phenomena.
    [Show full text]
  • The Formalism > Physicality
    The First Gene, David L. Abel, Editor 2011, pp 325-356 ISBN: 978-0-9657988-9-1 Chapter 12: The Formalism > Physicality (F > P) Principle * David L. Abel Department of ProtoBioCybernetics/ProtoBioSemiotics Director, The Gene Emergence Project The Origin-of-Life Science Foundation, Inc. 113 Hedgewood Dr. Greenbelt, MD 20770-1610 USA ABSTRACT: The F > P Principle states that “Formalism not only describes, but preceded, prescribed, organized, and continues to govern and predict Phys- icality.” The F > P Principle is an axiom that defines the ontological primacy of formalism in a presumed objective reality that transcends both human epis- temology, our sensation of physicality, and physicality itself. The F > P Prin- ciple works hand in hand with the Law of Physicodynamic Incompleteness, which states that physicochemical interactions are inadequate to explain the mathematical and formal nature of physical law relationships. Physicodynam- ics cannot generate formal processes and procedures leading to nontrivial func- tion. Chance, necessity and mere constraints cannot steer, program or opti- mize algorithmic/computational success to provide desired nontrivial utility. As a major corollary, physicodynamics cannot explain or generate life. Life is invariably cybernetic. The F > P Principle denies the notion of unity of Pre- scriptive Information (PI) with mass/energy. The F > P Principle distinguishes instantiation of formal choices into physicality from physicality itself. The arbitrary setting of configurable switches and the selection of symbols in any Material Symbol System (MSS) is physicodynamically indeterminate— decoupled from physicochemical determinism. Correspondence/Reprint request: Dr. David L. Abel, Department of ProtoBioCybernetics/ProtoBioSemiotics The Origin-of-Life Science Foundation, Inc., 113 Hedgewood Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Avicenna's Theory of Minima Naturalia Jon Mcginnis University of Missouri-St
    University of Missouri, St. Louis IRL @ UMSL Philosophy Faculty Works Philosophy 1-2015 A Small Discovery: Avicenna's Theory of Minima Naturalia Jon McGinnis University of Missouri-St. Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://irl.umsl.edu/philosophy-faculty Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation McGinnis, J. "A Small Discovery: Avicenna’s Theory of Minima Naturalia." Journal of the History of Philosophy, vol. 53 no. 1, 2015, pp. 1-24. Project MUSE, doi:10.1353/hph.2015.0002 http://irl.umsl.edu/philosophy-faculty/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy at IRL @ UMSL. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Works by an authorized administrator of IRL @ UMSL. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Small Discovery: Avicenna’s Theory of Minima Naturalia Jon McGinnis Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 53, Number 1, January 2015, pp. 1-24 (Article) Published by Johns Hopkins University Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.2015.0002 For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/566924 Access provided by Missouri @ St Louis, Univ of (17 Feb 2017 19:06 GMT) A Small Discovery: Avicenna’s Theory of Minima Naturalia JON MCGINNIS* ABSTRACT There has been a long-held misconception among historians of philosophy and science that apart from brief comments in Aristotle and Averroes, the theory of minima naturalia had to await Latin Schoolmen for its full articulation. Recently scholars have shown that far from sporadic comments on minima naturalia, Averroes in fact had a fully developed and well-integrated theory of them.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (2MB)
    Cunningham, Graeme James (2018) Law, rhetoric, and science: historical narratives in Roman law. PhD thesis. https://theses.gla.ac.uk/41030/ Copyright and moral rights for this work are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This work cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Enlighten: Theses https://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] Law, Rhetoric, and Science: Historical Narratives in Roman Law. Graeme James Cunningham LL.B. (Hons.), LL.M., M.Litt. Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. School of Law, College of Social Sciences, University of Glasgow. September 2018 Abstract. The consensus of scholarship has upheld the view that Roman law is an autonomous science. A legal system, which, due to its systematic, doctrinal principles, was able to maintain an inherent and isolated logic within the confines of its own disciplinary boundaries, excluding extra-legal influence. The establishment of legal science supposedly took place in the late second to early first century BC, when the famed Roman jurist, Quintus Mucius Scaevola pontifex, is supposed to have first treated law in a scientific way under the guidance of Greek categorical thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of DTM'03
    Towards a constitutive foundation for the creation of a scientific formalism for product realization Motte, Damien 2003 Document Version: Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Motte, D. (2003). Towards a constitutive foundation for the creation of a scientific formalism for product realization. Unpublished. Total number of authors: 1 General rights Unless other specific re-use rights are stated the following general rights apply: Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Read more about Creative commons licenses: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. LUND UNIVERSITY PO Box 117 221 00 Lund +46 46-222 00 00 A SCIENTIFIC FORMALISM FOR PRODUCT REALIZATION IN A GLOBAL MANUFACTURING ENTERPRISE: AN OPPORTUNITY FOR GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
    [Show full text]