DOCSLIB.ORG

Download Download

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Download Download RESEAS DE LIBROS/ BOOK REVIEWS B RJE BYDÉN and CHRISTINA THOMSEN TH RNQVIST (eds.) The Aristotelian Tradition: Aristotle’s Works on Logic and Metaph sics and Their Reception in the Middle Ages Papers in Medieval Studies 28, Toronto Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies 2010 125 pp. ISBN4 2080888458286 Reseado por SARA L. UCKELMAN, Durham Universi y s.l.uckelman%durham.ac.uk This book brings oge her welve ar icles on he opic of he in erpre a ion and recep ion of Aris o le’s works on logic and me aphysics in he Middle Ages. Af er ou lining a brief his ory of Aris o elian ransmission and commen ary from Aris o le’s successor, Theophras us, up hrough o he 1, h cen ury, he in roduc ion makes precise he scope of he volume. The primary focus is from he early 12 h cen ury up hrough he firs half of he 15 h cen ury, in he La in, Arabic, and .reek radi ions. In he La in ra0 di ion, emphasis is placed on he pre0Thomis ic1Alber ine recep ion of Aris o le, wi h chap ers by 2ulie 3rumberg0Chaumon , S en Ebbesen, 4eine 4ansen, Simo Knuu ila, Ana Mar5a Mora-M6r7ue8, and Chris ina Thomsen Th9rn7vis , demons ra ing he rich e: ual and concep ual developmen s ha wen on in ha period, hough A7uinas and his successors are no neglec ed, being discussed in chap ers by Fabri8io Amerini and 2akob Le h Fink. Unsurprisingly, he forerunner in he discussion of he Arabic radi ion, in Amerini’s chap er, is Averroes (ibn Ru=d); somewha surprisingly, here is no chap er devo ed o Avicenna. The .reek radi ion is discussed hrough he lens of he works of .eorge .emis os (Ple hon), he focus of chap ers by 39rAe 3ydBn, and 3ydBn, Ebbesen, Fink, 4ansen, Ka erina Ierodiakonou, Mora-M6r7ue8, and Miira Tuominen. Finally, here are wo chap ers, by David 3loch and Michail Perama 8is, which focus direc ly on Aris o le in erpre a ion, ra her han recep ion and which do no fi nea ly in o any of he hree main radi ions. Ra her han discussing he chap ers as hey are ordered in he book, I’ll bring hem all oge her under each of hese hree dis inc radi ions, af er firs covering 3loch’s and Perema 8is’s, which fi in o none of he radi ions. Modern Aristotelian exegesis Two chap ers are concerned predominan ly wi h he in erpre a ion of Aris o le, ra her han i Cs ransmission or recep ion. In his chap er, DAris o le on he E:ac ness or Cer ain y of Knowledge in Posterior Anal.tics I.2EF (pp. 1510161), 3loch a emp s o elucida e one of he Dmos enigma ic passages in he 0orpus Aristotelicum F (p. 151) which a emp s o rela e analyses of fac s and causes o he rela ive e:ac ness of sciences, 8EaI10 II. Appealing o he medieval radi ion in which 2ames of Venice ransla ed as certior , 3loch argues ha cen uries of modern commen a ors have missed he mark, and ha Aris o le is no alking abou he e:ac ness of he sciences bu of heir cer ain y. Perama 8is also akes up a opic of Aris o le in erpre a ion in his chap er, DAris o le’s KLogical’ Level of Me aphysical Inves iga ionF (pp. 81-1I0), focusing on he ransla ion of Revista Espaola de Filosofa Medieval, 26/1 (2019), ISS : 1133-0902, pp. 155-175 156 REVIEWS in Metaph.sics . The narrow goal of his ra her long chap er is D o specify he salien fea ures of a par icular ype of case, he me aphysical Klogical’ in7uiry carried ou in Metaph.sics F, s ar ing wi h 4, wi hou Dcharac eri8ing he sense of 7ui e generally or even offering i s meaning wi hin he limi ed con e: of his bookF (p. 85). One conse7uence of his specifica ion is he impor an recogni ion ha Dwha is in he Metaph.sics , hen, may differ significan ly from wha is in he Anal.tics F (p. ,6). The 5atin tradition Opening he book is 4anson’s chap er DAccoun ing for Aristo le’s Ca egories: Some No es on he Medieval Sufficientiae Praedicamentorum before Alber he .rea F (pp. 16048). 4anson ackles a perennial 7ues ion in Aris o le in erpre a ionN Ohy these en ca egoriesP Pos 0medieval scholars such as Kan and Mill denigra ed Aris o le’s choice of ca egories as being unmo iva ed or incomple e (pp. 16-1E). 4owever, many medieval Aris o elian commen a ors, especially hose before Alber he .rea , a emp ed o show D ha he lis is nei her redundan nor defec ive, bu e:ac ly as i should beF (p. 1E) via he me hod of he Dsufficiency of he predicamen s». One of he mos influen ial Aris o elian e: s, af er i ’s re0dissemina ion in he 12 h cen ury, was he Sophistical Refutations . Ebbesen in his chap er DDemons ra ive Dispu0 a ion – A contradiction in adiecto P Medieval and Recen Commen a ors on Aris o le’s Sophistical Refutations , Chap er 2F (pp. 162018E) a ends o a close reading of his e: , and ca egorises differen ways in which medieval and modern commen a ors a emp ed o unders and he no ion of a Ddemons ra ive dispu a ionF – a seemingly con radic ory combina ion which Aris o le himself e:plici ly e:cludes in he Prior Anal.tics (p. 165). The responses o he worry ha a demons ra ive deduc ion is no a dispu a ion included no only solu ions bu also fur her problems, such as Da worry whe her here is any way a all ha he four ypes Rof dispu a ionS can be made in o species of he same genus» (p. 181). One common opic for commen ary, whe her ancien , medieval, or modern, is Aris o0 le’s modal syllogis ic as presen ed in he Prior Anal.tics , i s seeming inconsis ency and unsys ema ici y making i ripe for revision. This is he subAec of Knuu ila’s chap er, DEarly Medieval Discussions of Modal Syllogis icF (pp. 214022E), where he akes us on a our of reac ions o he opic from Ale:ander of Aphrodisias and 2ohn Philoponus all he way up o Campsall, Ockham, and 3uridan, wi h a brief (one paragraph only) digression on Avicenna and Averroes along he way. From he poin of view of e: ual ransmission, i is in eres ing o no e ha Knuu ila hinks ha if Kilwardby did no have access o he Anon.mus Aurelianiensis III ( he oldes known La in commen ary on he Prior Anal.tics ), hen bo h he and he anonymous au hor had access o ano her e: , perhaps Da La in ransla ion of a los si: h-cen ury .reek commen ary or a la er 3y8an ine compila ion of scholiaF (p. 22I). 3o h he la e an i7ue commen ary radi ion and he syllogis ic are aken up in Th9rn7vis ’s chap er, D3ridging he 3eginner’s .ap: Apuleius, 3oe hius, and Porphyry on he Ca egorical SyllogismF (pp. 2280248). Th9rn7vis 7ues ions he radi ional s ory, in Revista Espaola de Filosofa Medieval, 26/1 (2019), ISS : 1133-0902, pp. 155-175 RESE'AS 15E which 3oe hius drew upon Apuleius’s Peri hermeneias when wri ing his De s.llogismo categorico , and Dpropose a differen e:plana ion and discuss i s implica ions for previous heories on he possible sources and overall aim of ApuleiusCs workF (p. 228). Ohile 3oe hiusCs and Apuleius’s works share many similari ies, i is more likely ha hey were ul ima ely drawing from a common source han ha 3oe hius was direc ly working wi h Apuleius (p. 245). Fur hermore, she iden ifies 3oe hius’s model as DPorphyry’s los in roduc ion o he ca egorical syllogismF (p. 24E), and he similari ies be ween Porphyry and Apuleius are due o he wo of them sharing a source (p. 2460. The final chap er devo ed o he syllogism is 3rumberg0Chaumon ’s, DForm and Ma er of he Syllogism in Anon.mus 0antabrigiensis F (pp. 188021I). The Anon.mus 0anta- brigiensis e: , wri en a he urn of he hir een h cen ury, is closely associa ed wi h wo sligh ly earlier e: s, he Anon.mi Aurelianenses I and II. 3rumberg0Chaumon argues ha aken oge her, hese hree e: s and heir discussions of he form0ma er dis inc ion wi h respec o syllogisms represen Da decisive urning poin in he radi ion of commen aries on he Sophistical Refutations F (p. 18,), as i is in hese e: s, and mos especially in An0ant , he mos well0developed and coheren of he hree, ha D he form0 ma er dis inc ion becomes for he firs ime ac ually ins rumen al in he analysis and classifica ion of he hir een fallacies in he Sophistical Refutations F (p.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Kronos 1-2018 Angielski 40 Do Internetu.Indd
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2018 Mortality of the Soul and Immortality of the Active Mind (ΝΟΥΣ ΠΟΊΗΤΊΚÓΣ) in Aristotle. Some hints Ferber, Rafael Abstract: The paper gives (I) a short introduction to Aristotle’s theory of the soul in distinction to Plato’s and tries again (II) to answer the question of whether the individual or the general active mind of human beings is immortal by interpreting “When separated (฀฀฀฀฀฀฀ì฀)” (de An. III, 5, 430a22) as the decisive argument for the latter view. This strategy of limiting the question has the advantage of avoiding the probably undecidable question of whether this active ฀฀฀฀ is human or divine. The paper closes with an outlook (III) on the Christian belief in the resurrection of body and soul in a spiritual body (฀฀฀฀ ฀฀฀฀฀฀฀฀฀ó฀) (1 Corinthians: 15, 44) by accentuating the ethical aspect of the belief in individual immortality as a “need of reason” (Vernunftbedürfnis) (Kant, Critique of Practical Reason, A 256–258). Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-169760 Journal Article Published Version Originally published at: Ferber, Rafael (2018). Mortality of the Soul and Immortality of the Active Mind (ΝΟΥΣ ΠΟΊΗΤΊΚÓΣ) in Aristotle. Some hints. Kronos : philosophical journal, 7:132-140. VOLUME VII / 2018 / ISSN 2392-0963 Wawrzyniec Rymkiewicz, Szukalski – A Transgression in Search of Identity Stanisław Szukalski, Drawings André Laks, Articulating the De Motu Animalium. The Place of the Treatise within the Corpus Aristotelicum Claudia Baracchi, Unheard-of Friendship.
    [Show full text]
  • AVERROES on CHANCE Introduction After Discussing
    CHAPTER FOUR AVERROES ON CHANCE Introduction After discussing chance and determinism in Avicenna, we now turn to Averroes’ views. His theory of chance, like that of Avicenna, is based on Aristotle’s discussion in Physics II (195b31–200b8) and is expounded in his commentaries. Averroes thus explains chance in his three commentaries on the Physics, short, middle and long, but obviously his most detailed discussion is to be found in his Long Commentary on the Physics, since his long commentaries contain point for point analyses of Aristotle’s text. This commentary shall consti- tute the starting point for my study of Averroes’ views on chance. Passages from other works by the Commentator (as Averroes was known in medieval Latin philosophical circles) both commentaries and his original works, will complement this study. Following the order of Aristotle’s text, the Andalusian philosopher first considers and refutes his predecessors’ positions and then pre- sents his own solution. In discussing the meaning of chance for Aristotle, Averroes, as is his wont, discusses the views not only of Aristotle’s predecessors such as the Presocratics but also those of late Aristotelians and of Avicenna. Reversing the order of his argument, I shall start with his own position before presenting his criticism of his predecessors and drawing a comparison between his and Avicenna’s position. In view of the fact that Averroes’ commentaries were meant to expound and elucidate Aristotle’s philosophy, question arises whether his exposition reflects the true meaning of his text. However in gen- eral the issue of Aristotle’s own views and whether Averroes expo- sitions truly reflect those of Aristotle cannot be here discussed at length, because what Aristotle exactly meant has itself been the object of controversy and has engaged the interpretive efforts of commen- tators and scholars for centuries if not millennia.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Aristotle's Metaphysics / C.D.C
    SUBSTANTIAL KNOWLEDGE ARISTOTLE’S METAPHYSICS SUBSTANTIAL KNOWLEDGE ARISTOTLE’S METAPHYSICS C.D.C. REEVE hackett publishing company, inc. indianapolis/cambridge Copyright © 2000 by Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved 06 05 04 03 02 01 00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 For further information, please address: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. P.O. Box 44937 Indianapolis, IN 46244-0937 www.hackettpublishing.com Cover and interior design by Abigail Coyle Cover photograph: "The Inheritance of Form." Reproduced by permission of the artist. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Reeve, C.D.C., 1948– Substantial knowledge : Aristotle's metaphysics / C.D.C. Reeve. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and indexes. ISBN 0-87220-515-0 (cloth : alk. paper)—ISBN 0-87220-514-2 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Aristotle—Contributions in metaphysics. 2. Metaphysics. 3. Aristotle— Contributions in philosophy of substance. 4. Substance (Philosophy) I. Title. B491.M4 R44 2000 100'.92—dc21 99-052539 ISBN-13: 978-0-87220-515-4 (cloth) ISBN-13: 978-0-87220-514-7 (paper) eISBN: 978-1-60384-014-9 (ebook) For George and John not many behold God he is only for those of 100 percent pneuma —Zbigniew Herbert “Report from Paradise” TABLE of CONTENTS Introduction xiii Abbreviations of Aristotle’s Works xvii ONE PLATONISM 1 1.1 Separation 1 1.2 Platonic Forms 10 1.3 Problems with Platonic Forms 13 TWO SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 18 2.1 Aristotelian Sciences 18 2.2 Dialectic and First Principles 21 2.3 Natural Sciences 27 2.4 Natural and Theoretical Sciences 35 2.5
    [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]
  • Interpreting Aristotle's Posterior Analytics in Late Antiquity
    Interpreting Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics in Late Antiquity and Beyond edited by Frans A. J. de Haas, Mariska Leunissen, and Marije Martijn Boston/Leiden: Brill, 2010. Philosophia Antiqua 124. Pp. ISBN 978–90–04–20127–9. Cloth $153.00 xxiv + 269 Reviewed by Sten Ebbesen University of Copenhagen [email protected] Recent years have seen the publication of a number of collective volumes studying the fate of particular Aristotelian works through the centuries.The present volume is a welcome addition to the bibliography. Its 10 essays are arranged in three parts: (1) Concept Formation in Posterior Analytics II 19, (2) Metaphysics as a Science, and (3) Demonstration, Definition and Causation. Inevitably, the quality of such a collective work is not even all the way through but on the whole it is very satisfactory, and the concen- tration on three important topics gives some coherence to the volume. The title’s promise of information about the fate of An. post. in Late Antiquity is fulfilled by most of the constituent essays, whereas there is precious little about the ‘Beyond’ except for one essay about Eu- stratius of Nicaea and one about Roger Bacon plus some that discuss pseudo-Philoponus on An. post. 2 (whom the authors wrongly tend to identify with Philoponus himself; see more about this below). The editors’ introduction contains some sweeping statements about the way An. post. was treated in the Middle Ages. At least as regards the Latin world, it is hardly true that ‘either the commentaries had an external aim, primarily the defense of theology as a science, or the commentators selected a fairly limited number of themes useful to the areas of philosophy of their interest’, as we read on page xix.
    [Show full text]
  • The Earliest Translations of Aristotle's Politics and The
    ECKART SCHÜTRUMPF THE EARLIEST TRANSLATIONS OF ARISTOTle’S POLITICS AND THE CREATION OF POLITICAL TERMINOLOGY 8 MORPHOMATA LECTURES COLOGNE MORPHOMATA LECTURES COLOGNE 8 HERAUSGEGEBEN VON GÜNTER BLAMBERGER UND DIETRICH BOSCHUNG ECKART SCHÜTRUMPF THE EARLIEST TRANSLATIONS OF ARISTOTLe’s POLITICS AND THE CREATION OF POLITICAL TERMINOLOGY WILHELM FINK unter dem Förderkennzeichen 01UK0905. Die Verantwortung für den Inhalt der Veröffentlichung liegt bei den Autoren. Bibliografische Informationen der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen National­ biblio grafie; detaillierte Daten sind im Internet über www.dnb.d­nb.de abrufbar. Alle Rechte, auch die des auszugweisen Nachdrucks, der fotomechanischen Wieder gabe und der Übersetzung vorbehalten. Dies betrifft auch die Vervielfälti­ gung und Übertragung einzelner Textabschnitte, Zeichnungen oder Bilder durch alle Verfahren wie Speicherung und Übertragung auf Papier, Transparente, Filme, Bänder, Platten und andere Medien, soweit es nicht § 53 und 54 UrhG ausdrücklich gestatten. © 2014 Wilhelm Fink, Paderborn Wilhelm Fink GmbH & Co. Verlags­KG, Jühenplatz 1, D­33098 Paderborn Internet: www.fink.de Lektorat: Sidonie Kellerer, Thierry Greub Gestaltung und Satz: Kathrin Roussel, Sichtvermerk Printed in Germany Herstellung: Ferdinand Schöningh GmbH & Co. KG, Paderborn ISBN 978-3-7705-5685-4 CONTENT 1. The earliest Latin translations of Aristotle— William of Moerbeke 9 2. Nicole Oresme 25 3. Leonardo Bruni’s principles of translation 28 4. Bruni’s translation of Aristotle’s Politics 33 5. The political terminology in Bruni’s translation— a new Humanist concept of res publica? 39 6. The controversy over Bruni’s translation— contemporary and modern 65 Appendix 77 Bibliography 78 This study goes back ultimately to a response I gave on two pa­ pers presented on “Translating Aristotle’s Politics in Medieval and Renaissance Europe” at the “International Conference on Translation.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies on the Ancient Catalogues of Aristotle's Works
    Studies on the Ancient Catalogues of Aristotle's Works https://www.ontology.co/biblio/corpus-aristotelicum-biblio-two.htm Theory and History of Ontology by Raul Corazzon | e-mail: [email protected] Bibliography on the Ancient Catalogues of Aristotle's Writings and the Rediscovery of the Corpus Aristotelicum ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE STUDIES IN ENGLISH 1 di 22 28/03/2017 11:57 Studies on the Ancient Catalogues of Aristotle's Works https://www.ontology.co/biblio/corpus-aristotelicum-biblio-two.htm ENGLISH See also: The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers by Diogenes Laërtius. A Bibliography 1. Barnes, Jonathan. 1997. "Roman Aristotle." In Philosophia Togata Ii. Plato and Aristotle at Rome, edited by Barnes, Jonathan and Griffin, Miriam, 1-69. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Reprinted in: Gregory Nagy (ed.), Greek Literature in the Roman Period and in Late Antiquity, New York, Routledge, 2001 pp. 119-187; revised edition in J. Barnes, Mantissa: Essays in Ancient Philosophy IV, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2015, pp. 407-478. "When Theophrastus died, his library, which included the library of Aristotle, was carried off to the Troad. His successors found nothing much to read; the Lyceum sank into a decline; and Peripatetic ideas had little influence on the course of Hellenistic philosophy. It was only with the rediscovery of the library that Aristotelianism revived — and it revived in Italy. For the library went from the Troad to Athens — and thence, as part of Sulla’s war-booty, to Rome. There Andronicus of Rhodes produced the ‘Roman edition’ of the corpus Aristotelicum. It was the first complete and systematic version of Aristotle’s works, the first publication in their full form of the technical treatises, the first genuinely critical edition of the text.
    [Show full text]