Through an extended discussion of the German higher education system in comparison with other European countries and the US, this paper suggests that academic freedom is not simply a consequence of institutional arrangements. It is a consequence of looking at what one is doing, at one's own professional responsibility. Academic freedom must be sustained and protected not only by the state or institutional arrangements of universities, but must also be protected by every academician. If professors do not resist intrusion on (...) their freedom in either collective or individual ways, academic freedom is in danger. If, for example, a faculty of medicine were to allow conflicts of interest to develop between the freedom of research and the commercial interest of cooperating enterprises, if it does not collectively sense that there may be an intrusion on academic freedom resulting from the influence on their research from pharmaceutical corporations, for example, academic freedom will be in endangered from within the university. In a society where professors act this way, simply granting academic freedom may be a fine thing, but it does not really fulfill freedom's promise. (shrink)

The nature of motion -- Causes, forces, and resistance -- The concept of the function in fourteenth-century physics -- The significance of the theory of impetus for Scholastic natural philosophy -- Galileo and the Scholastic theory of impetus -- The theory of the elements and the problem of their participation in compounds -- The achievements of late Scholastic natural philosophy.

Avicenna’s theory of compounds had virtually no effect on scholastic philosophy. It is always mentioned, indeed, but only to be rejected. At most, one finds that certain thinkers take up this or that particular thought of his; or that, regarding the issue of compounds, the fundamental Averroistic or Thomistic position exhibits a certain Avicennistic tinge. This is particularly the case when it comes to Albertus Magnus, who wants to follow the thoroughly Aristotelian-Averroistic conception, while being convinced that the doctrines of (...) Averroes and Avicenna are fundamentally the same. His judgment agrees above all with that of Averroes. Since one and the same matter cannot receive many substantial forms, one cannot say that the elements in the compound are contained such that the substantial forms are wholly preserved. On the other hand, however, since the properties of the elements are found in the compound body, neither can one say that their substantial forms are in no way preserved. “And for that reason Aristotle said that the intensities of those substantial forms are reduced, and thus that in part they are preserved and in part they are changed: and so all arrive at an intermediate.”. (shrink)