There is a central doctrine in Aristotle that usually isn’t recognized in its importance: the affirmation of the difference and the plurality. In the course of the centuries, Aristotelism lost which was perhaps its most characteristic and specific feature versus Platonism, that is, its criticism of unity and its defense of plurality. The first principle is not the One but the plurality. The horizon of thinking is not the unity but the diversity of the logos. The unity of the (...) logos presupposes the differences within reality. Heidegger attracted attention to the peculiarity of the practical philosophy of Aristotle. It was the case of dialectics, rhetoric, poetics, ethics, politics, etc. We are referring to knowledges that are art rather than science. Nothing is so differentiated as human action, as it is always performed from a new starting point. Dialectic and rhetorical speeches are always circumscribed to the individual. (shrink)

There is a central doctrine in Aristotle that usually isn’t recognized in its importance: the affirmation of the difference and the plurality. In the course of the centuries, Aristotelism lost which was perhaps its most characteristic and specific feature versus Platonism, that is, its criticism of unity and its defense of plurality. The first principle is not the One but the plurality. The horizon of thinking is not the unity but the diversity of the logos. The unity of the (...) logos presupposes the differences within reality. Heidegger attracted attention to the peculiarity of the practical philosophy of Aristotle. It was the case of dialectics, rhetoric, poetics, ethics, politics, etc. We are referring to knowledges that are art rather than science. Nothing is so differentiated as human action, as it is always performed from a new starting point. Dialectic and rhetorical speeches are always circumscribed to the individual. (shrink)

The paper deals with the reception and modifications of aristotelism in the epistemology, metaphysics and theology of John Duns Scotus. As a consequence of these modifications Scotus became the founder of a new philosophical-theological vocabulary. In the first part of the contribution the history of aristotelism in the Hellenic period is outlined; the second part examines two lines of aristotelism: that developed in the Latin European West on one hand and that of the Greek-Arabic East on the (...) other hand. The reception and modification of aristotelism in the considerations of J. D. Scotus is examined in more detail on the historical-philosophical background in the third part: rational intuition, ontological conception of metaphysics as scientia transcendens, theology as a practical science. In conclusion the author shows how Scotus’s modification of aristotelism influenced the rise of modern science. (shrink)

This is an English translation of Swieżawski’s original article titled “Początki nowożytnego arystotelizmu chrześcijańskiego,” published in Roczniki Filozoficzne 19 (1971): 41–56. The paper focuses on four main topics: (a) increased theological standing of Aristotle in the 15th century; (b) critical concerns over the compatibility of Aristotle’s philosophy with Christianity, as well as over its interpretation by Averroes; (c) search for the “historical Aristotle” and an objective assessment of the resultant interpretations of Aristotle’s philosophy; (d) identification of Thomism with Christian Aristotelianism.

The article analyzes the activity of the greatest classic of the Islamic philosophy - Ibn Sina, aimed at the revision of Aristotelianism, mainly in terms of its synthesis with Islamic monotheism. Preferential attention is paid to the metaphysical section of Avicennian multivolume encyclopedia “The Healing”. Instead of Aristotelian God / the Prime Mover as the final cause, which serves as the source of the movement of the world, Avicenna establishes God / Necessary Being, who acts as the Giver of being. (...) Developing the ontological foundation of creationism, i.e. the creation of every thing in the world, the philosopher introduces a distinction between essence and existence, which will pass through the subsequent history of philosophy. Ibn Sina thoroughly modifies the Aristotelian doctrine of the unity of God and His essential cataphatic attributes. The intellectual narcissism of God, Who only knows Himself in Stagirite, he changes with the concept of Divine Omniscience and His providence of all existents. Ibn Sina transforms Aristotelian eternalism into eternalistic creationism, modifying the emanationist scheme of cosmogenesis advanced by al-Farabi, in which the process of proceeding of the existents from the First Principle appears as an intellectual act. The Muslim philosopher complements Aristotelian cosmology with the doctrine of angels, whom he identifies with cosmic intellects and souls as the governors of the celestial spheres. Avicennian radical innovation is in the doctrine of Active Intellect, who is not only the ruler of the sublunar world, but actually is its demiurge. This intellect is assigned with the function of the illumination of the human intellect, as well as with the role of the archangel Gabriel the transmitter of divine revelation according to Muslim tradition. From the philosophical perspective, Avicenna develops alien to Aristotelianism topics related to the prophecy and revelation, the immortality of the soul and its otherworldly fate. (shrink)

The paper examines the definitions of the concept ‘philosophy’ resp. ‘the philosopher’ in Florentine renaissance Platonism, namely Marsilio Ficino and his scholar Francesco di Zanobi Cattani da Diacceto. Following Socrates and Pythagoras, Ficino distinguishes between mundane philosophy and divine sapientia. In contrast to his teacher, Diacceto’s Aristotelism rejects the Pythagoreanism and connects philosophy with sapientia. In order to show how the differences between Ficino and Diacceto emerge, three more contemporaries are taken into consideration: Christoforo Landino, Angelo Poliziano and Giovanni (...) Pico della Mirandola. As a result of this examination, it can be said that the definition of ‘philosophy’ in Florentine renaissance Platonism tends either to Pythagoreism or to Aristotelism or to both. Closely connected with the debate on philosophy are topics and maxims such as meditatio mortis, theologia negativa, docta ignorantia, scio ne scio, nosce te ipsum, ne quid nimis et al. (shrink)

L’« aristotélisme » est resté très largement étudié tout au long du XVIIe siècle, mais certainement pas de manière uniforme. Une rupture décisive est intervenue avec l’avènement du cartésianisme qui parvient à se poser en système rival suffisamment crédible pour obliger à une nouvelle donne, à la fois dans l’enseignement prodigué à l’université et dans la pratique philosophique en général. Cet article explique la nature de ces transformations imposées que l’aristotélisme a dû subir, puis examine les différentes façons dont, chacun (...) à leur manière bien spécifique, Hobbes, Spinoza, Malebranche et Leibniz se sont situés par rapport à l’héritage et à la figure du Stagirite. Comment, en l’espace de quelques décennies seulement, l’aristotélisme qui avait tant dominé le paysage philosophique pendant des siècles s’est-il trouvé mis au rang de vestige de l’histoire? (shrink)

Pour rendre compte de la première démonstration d’existence d’une grandeur irrationnelle, les historiens des sciences et les commentateurs d’Aristote se réfèrent aux textes sur l’incommensurabilité de la diagonale qui se trouvent dans les Premiers Analytiques, les plus anciens sur la question. Les preuves usuelles proposées dérivent d’un même modèle qui se trouve à la fin du livre X des Éléments d’Euclide. Le problème est que ses conclusions, passant par la représentation des fractions comme rapport de deux entiers premiers entre eux, (...) i.e. la proposition VII.22 des Éléments, ne correspondent pas aux écrits aristotéli­ciens. Dans cet article, nous proposons une nouvelle démonstration, conforme aux textes des Analytiques, fondés sur des résultats très anciens de la théorie du pair et de l’impair. Ne passant pas par la proposition VII.22, ni par aucune autre propriété établie par l’absurde, cette irrationalité apparaît comme le premier résultat que l’on ne pouvait établir par une autre méthode. L’importance de ce résultat, révélant un nouveau domaine mathématique, celui des grandeurs irrationnelles, rend compte de la centralité que cette forme de raisonnement acquiert alors, d’abord en mathématique, puis dans tout type de discours rationnel. À partir des conséquences qui suivent de cette nouvelle démonstration, on peut interpréter très simplement la leçon sur les irrationnels du passage mathématique figurant dans le Théétète de Platon (147d-148b), ce que nous ferons dans un article à paraître dans un prochain numéro. (shrink)

La riscoperta del pensiero di Franz Brentano, in Italia e all’estero, stimola a verificare la centralità e la vitalità della sua presenza in una sempre più vasta cerchia di lettori e di discepoli. In quest’ottica rientra il confronto con l’insigne medievista, archivista e studioso di Lutero, Henrich-Suso Denifle. Tuttavia, ad eccezione di sporadici accenni, il problema del rapporto Denifle – Brentano è stato relegato nel dimenticatoio, anche se lo stesso Brentano a suo tempo aveva pubblicamente annoverato Denifle tra i suoi (...) discepoli. Qui si utilizza per la prima un carteggio inedito intercorso tra i due autori per chiarire questo rapporto. Esso, dunque, costituisce una fonte documentaria, finora mai utilizzata, di fondamentale importanza per poter comprendere le posizioni iniziali di Denifle e nello stesso tempo poter integrare la conoscenza, finora non del tutto chiara, della produzione di Brentano fino al 1870. Si tratta di uno scambio epistolare che comprende l’arco di tempo racchiuso tra il 22 novembre 1867 e il 7 agosto del 1871. Le lettere sono tutte di argomento filosofico. (shrink)

This essay focuses on the thesis of the so-called »double truth« within the philosophical and theological milieu of the University of Altdorf during the XVIIth Century. The problem of the »double truth« that aroused in the scholastic discussions on Averroism, receives a particular form in the context of Altdorf. In fact, this unique discursive setting was inspired there by the two main tendencies that characterize that philosophical and theological milieu at that time, namely radical Paduan Aristotelism, and Lutheran orthodoxy. (...) Only apparently opposed, these two positions converge on that point. And the synthesis of these two currents of thought gives rise to an interesting justification of the paradox of the conflict »between true and true«: the development of a theory of different fields and levels of truth. (shrink)

Anthony Kenny e Orlando Todisco, in due diversi contesti, hanno proposto un originale accostamento tra Wittgenstein e alcuni filosofi francescani. Alla luce di questi studi è possibile chiedersi quale valore possa avere la nozione di francescanesimo wittgensteiniano e quale utilità essa ricopra nell’identificare i caratteri di una filosofia francescana. Nella prima parte considererò l’atteggiamento di Kenny nei confronti di Duns Scoto, le cui tesi, dapprima frettolosamente associate a quelle del neopositivismo, vengono poi adeguatamente contestualizzate all’interno della contrapposizione tra la tradizione (...) neoplatonica-agostiniana e l’aristotelismo radicale nell’Università di Parigi. Nella seconda parte, analizzerò il parallelo suggerito da Todisco tra Wittgenstein e Occam, con particolare attenzione alla filosofia del linguaggio, alla critica alla metafisica e alla nozione di ineffabilità. Dopo aver evidenziato i limiti storiografici di entrambe queste proposte, concluderò sostenendo che il francescanesimo wittgensteiniano non può essere considerato un progetto di ricerca autonomo capace di stabilire delle tesi comuni. Esso comunque non è una mera provocazione, in quanto offre interessanti considerazioni circa una affine modalità di porsi gli interrogativi filosofici da parte di Wittgenstein e dei filosofi francescani. Questo esito permette di identificare alcune condizioni necessarie perché si possa parlare di una filosofia francescana all’interno della storia della filosofia. In two very different contexts, Anthony Kenny and Orlando Todisco have proposed an original combination between Wittgenstein and some Franciscan thinkers. Thanks to their studies it is possible to question the value and the usability of the expression Wittgensteinian Franciscanism in order to identify the features of a Franciscan philosophy. In the first paragraph, I will take the approach of Kenny about Duns Scotus into consideration. At the beginning of his career, Kenny hastily associates Scotus’ theses to the Neo-Positivistic ones, but in his mature works, Kenny adequately contextualizes them within the contrast between, on the one hand, the Neoplatonic-Augustinian tradition and, on the other, the radical Aristotelism held at the Paris University. In the second paragraph, I will study in depth the parallelism suggested by Todisco between Wittgenstein and Occam, paying particular attention to the philosophy of language, to the criticism toward some types of metaphysics, and to the notion of ineffability. After having underlined the historiographic limits of both of these proposals, I will conclude arguing that Wittgensteinian Franciscanism cannot be appreciated as an autonomous research project able to establish common theses. All the same, it is not a mere provocation, in fact it presents interesting considerations about analogous modalities to submit philosophical questions shared between Wittgenstein and Franciscan thinkers. This outcome allows to distinguish some necessary conditions in order to identify a Franciscan philosophy in the history of Western thought. (shrink)

According to the muslim faith of Ibn Bâyya (Avempace) and to the aristotelism and neoplatonism of his philosophy, this Andalusian author in all his works asks for the first grounds of all reality and being. And Ibn Bâyya finds these grounds in the Agent Intellect (who, probably, is the philosophical version of God) and in the human reason and conscience. Thus, the ideal of the philosophe and of the wise is the union of both together: the reason/conscience and Agent (...) Intellect (i.e. God) by means of an intellectualis mystic or “amor Dei intellectualis”. (shrink)

I would like to start with a historical question or, more precisely, a question pertaining to the history of science itself. It is a widely accepted idea that Aristotelism has been an obstacle to the emergence of modern physical science, and this was for at least two reasons. The first one is the cognitive role Aristotle is supposed to have attributed to perception. Instead of considering perception as an origin of error, Aristotle thinks that our senses provide us with (...) a reliable image of the external world. The perceptive knowledge is a kind of knowledge in its own right, and the theoretical knowledge is, in fact, the continuation of the perceptive knowledge in some way. The second reason is the presumed inability of the Aristotelian philosophers to apply mathematics to the physical world. This was a formidable obstacle because modern physics came to be but as a mathematical physics. Aristotelianism had therefore to be, so to speak, superseded by the Platonic movement that originated in Florence around Ficino in order to give modern physics the conditions of its appearance. Galileo had to say that “Nature is written with mathematical letters” and Descartes that “our senses do not teach us what things are, but to what extent they are useful or harmful to us”. Alexandre Koyré is right to consider Galilean physics to be basically Platonic. The theoretical justification Aristotle offers for the impossibility of a convergence between mathematics and physics seems to be based on some fundamental features of his philosophy, i.e. he rejects the Platonic conception of a unique science, encompassing all things, and replaces it with the doctrine of the incommunicability of genera, whose corollary is that there is but one science for each genus. (shrink)

The question about the faith and the science in the Middle Ages is very broad. For this reason, this paper reflects the thoughts of the author which are very significant for the comprehension of transition from the generation who faced the challenges of the Aristotelism in the 13th century and the Syllabus from 1277, to the generation which discussesed several questions related to the anthropological and metaphysical issue. In this respect Gonsalvus Hispanus, Duns Escoto’s teacher, helps us to understand (...) the reception of the idea of science in the post-condemnation context. We specially pay our attention to the 9th Question in order to consider the relationship between science and faith, knowledge of authority and scientific knowledge, science and wisdom. (shrink)

The question of whether homeopathy is a science is currently discussed almost exclusively against the background of the modern concept of natural science. This approach, however, fails to notice that homeopathy—in terms of history of science—rests on different roots that can essentially be traced back to two most influential traditions of science: on the one hand, principles and notions of Aristotelism which determined 2,000 years of Western history of science and, on the other hand, the modern concept of natural (...) science that has been dominating the history of medicine for less than 200 years. While Aristotle’s “science of the living” still included ontologic and teleologic dimensions for the sake of comprehending nature in a uniform way, the interest of modern natural science was reduced to functional and causal explanations of all phenomena for the purpose of commanding nature. In order to prevent further ecological catastrophes as well as to regain lost dimensions of our lives, the one-sidedness and theory-loadedness of our modern natural–scientific view of life should henceforth be counterbalanced by lifeworld–practical Aristotelic categories. In this way, the ground would be ready to conceive the scientific character of homeopathy—in a broader, Aristotelian sense. (shrink)

From the beginning of the sixties untill the end of the seventies, an intense debate took place in Germany that has become famous under the title "The Rehabilitation of Practical Philosophy". Its origin is essentially found in the philosophical positions which, while fairly different from one another, were later brought together under the single designation "neo-Aristotelism". The recovery of the Aristotelian understanding of praxis and of the ethical and political knowledge with which it is concerned has offered itself as (...) an alternative paradigm for the unitary notion of science that characterizes modernity, and has opened a perspective from which it is once again possible to examine in a critical manner the identification of science with theory posited in modernity, as well as the paleomodern and modern notion of reason and its development in the direction of mere instrumentality and functionalism. Therefore, despite quite a few unilateral decisions, the considerations and problems brought to our attention by the rehabilitation of practical philosophy and the neo-Aristotelians retain a disturbing relevance. (shrink)

Cet article s’intéresse en premier lieu à quelques passages des Esquisses pyrrhoniennes de Sextus (I 1-3 ; 8-10 ; III 119-122). Ces « études de cas » permettent d’examiner la relation dialectique entre Sextus et Aristote. Le Stagirite y est représenté à la fois comme une sorte de primus inter dogmaticos pares, et par conséquent comme une cible privilégiée des attaques pyrrhoniennes contre les dogmatismes, et, de façon indirecte, comme une sorte d’« ombre » se profilant derrière l’attitude critique de (...) Sextus. Parallèlement, la stratégie de Sextus consiste à utiliser le matériel aristotélicien à l’appui soit de l’attitude propre à l’ἀγωγή sceptique, soit de la construction d’une διαφωνία spécifique. En second lieu, la section finale de l’article examine en outre un passage difficile du Contre les moralistes (XI 77‑78), proposant une correction qui permettrait, en éliminant le nom d’Aristote, d’y voir une citation d’Ariston. (shrink)

Unlike many major figures in Western intellectual history, Hobbes has refused to become dated and quietly take his appointed place in the museum of historical scholarship. Whether by way of adoption or reaction, his ideas have remained vibrant forces in mankind's attempts to understand the problems and dilemmas of living peaceably with one another. As Richard Ashcraft said a few years ago: One of the standards by which the greatness of political theorists is measured, is their ability to evoke in (...) us new insights into 'the human condition'. Only a few political writers have risen Dionysus-like from the titanic assaults of their critics to become even more formidable forces in the shaping of our destiny. One of these giants is surely the irascible l and irrepressible Thomas Hobbes . Given the power of Hobbes's thought, it is not then perhaps surprising to find that his writings have generated seemingly endless scholarly controversy and an astonishing range of imcompatible interpretations. Among other things, he has been interpreted as a theist and an atheist, as a utilitarian and a deontologist, a humanist and a scientist, as a traditional natural law theorist and a legal positivist, a contractualist and an absolutist - indeed, as Professor Morris notes in his contribution to the present volume, 'as almost any kind of philosophical 'ist except Platonist or Aristotelist'. (shrink)

Can Pellegrino and Thomasma's book, A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice (1981), rightfully claim to be a step forward towards a systematic philosophy of medicine? We try to answer this question by focusing our comment upon three related aspects of the book, namely (1) the problem of philosophical method(s), (2) the alleged Aristotelian-Thomistic orientation, (3) the view of philosophical anthropology of the authors. It is first argued that it is doubtful whether there is as much philosophical method in the authors' (...) book as their reflections on philosophical method suggest. Second, we argue that if Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy is important to the authors, it is not so much because of its methods and content, as because it supplies them with a very convenient framework for didactically ordering and transmitting their views about what they consider to be — philosophically speaking — basic about medicine. Third we argue that the authors' conception of philosophical anthropology bears (in point of method and ontology) more resemblance to the humanistic naturalism of John Dewey, than to any of the European philosophical traditions (Aristotelism, (Neo)Thomism, Merleau-Pontyian phenomenology) listed in support of their philosophical enterprise. (shrink)

According to the muslim faith of Ibn Bâyya (Avempace) and to the aristotelism and neoplatonism of his philosophy, this andalusian author in all his works asks for the first grounds of all reality and being. And Ibn Bâyya finds these grounds in the Agent Intellect (who, probably, is the philosophical version of God) and in the human reason and conscience. Thus, the ideal of the philosophe and of the wise is the union of both together: the reason/conscience and Agent (...) Intellect (i.e. God) by means of an intellectualis mystic or "amor Dei intellectualis". (shrink)

Author brings forward a BioCosmological (metaphysical) conception that primarily explores the reasons of present ongoing and increasing global crises. In the issue, author substantively arrives at the conclusion (‘diagnosis’) of the current ‘cosmological insufficiency’ of modern philosophical and cultural community,wherein the leading ‘clinical form’ turns out to be the modern mainstream ‘presentism’, while the ‘patient's treatment’ (perceiving that ‘the patient’ signifies the whole process of life on Earth) – proves to be the urgent rehabilitation of Aristotelism and Russian philosophy (...) and science (neo-Aristotelism). Precisely in this course, author’s BioCosmological conception carries out a realistic and rational proposal that strives to construct a substantive comprehensive theoretical framework – for the tackling of these actual issues. (shrink)

The paper presents the moral conception of Charles Taylor as developed in his fundamental work Sources of the Self. The Making of Modern Identity, in which he tries from the perspective of modernized aristotelism to transform several assumptions of modern moral philosophy. Taylor's conception is based on ontologically rooted human action, putting stress at the same time on the individual freedom and the differences among individuals. From the idea of particular, self-creative beings it follows, that the questions of our (...) moral inclinations can not be answered simply in terms of universality. Each of us has his/her original way of living a good life. Taylor's moral conception stands between a deontologically oriented Kantian ethics with its emphasizing justice and individual rights and an Aristotelian ethics of a theleological self-affirmation with its priority of community and communal good. (shrink)

En 1910, Jan Lukasiewicz publiait Du principe de contradiction chez Aristote. Dans cet article, on explique les points principaux du livre de Lukasiewicz. Ce dernier affirme qu’Aristote n’a pas réussi dans sa tentative pour justifier le principe de contradiction. En fait, ce principe est moins logique qu’éthique, selon Lukasiewicz, et cela explique bien des difficultés posées par la théorie d’Aristote. On discute également de la façon dont Lukasiewicz utilise la notion d’« objets contradictoires », empruntée à la Théorie des Objets (...) de Meinong ; on montre que Lukasiewicz se situe dans le cadre d’une version brentanienne de l’aristotélisme. Certaines connexions entre Lukasiewicz et la conception wittgensteinienne de la nécessité ou le conservatisme logique de Quine sont indiquées. Le but de mon article est essentiellement d’encourager une lecture attentive du livre qui n’a pas reçu l’attention qu’il mérite parce qu’il a été écrit à l’origine en polonais. Souvent, les philosophes croient connaître son contenu à travers le résumé que Lukasiewicz écrivit en allemand en 1910, et qui a été traduit en anglais. Mais, en fait, il y a bien des choses importantes dans le livre qui n’apparaissent nullement dans le résumé.In 1910, Jan Lukasiewicz published On the Principle of Contradiction in Aristotle. In the present paper, I explain the main points in Lukasiewicz's book. Lukasiewicz claims that Aristotle was not successful in his attempt to justify the principle of contradiction. In fact, this principle is less logical than ethical, according to Lukasiewicz ; and this accounts for many of Aristotle's difficulties. Lukasiewicz's use of the notion of “contradictory objects”, taken from Meinong's Theory of Objects , is also discussed, and Lukasiewicz is shown to be situated within the Brentanian form of Aristotelism. I also indicate some connections between Lukasiewicz and Wittgenstein on necessity, and between Lukasiewicz and Quine on logical conservatism. The goal of the present paper is principally to encourage an attentive reading of a book that has not received the consideration it deserves because it was initially written in Polish. Often, philosophers believe that they grasp the content of the book through the brief abstract which Lukasiewicz wrote in German in 1910, and which has been translated into English ; but in fact there is much of importance which the abstract does not cover. (shrink)

Albert the Great extracts the best contributions of Neo-Platonism and Aristotelism. He examines the Aristotelian doctrine on the desire for truth present in human nature and the science of Metaphysics, which allows for an inkling of the source of such desire, but this desire is examined more in-depth by the Pseudo-Dionysius, being Theology the science that grants more answers and the most universal because it enables for greater perfection, not just intellectual but of the whole person.

The paper examines the definitions of the concept ›philosophy‹ resp. ›the philosopher‹ in Florentine renaissance Platonism, namely Marsilio Ficino and his scholar Francesco di Zanobi Cattani da Diacceto. Following Socrates and Pythagoras, Ficino distinguishes between mundane philosophy and divine sapientia. In contrast to his teacher, Diacceto's Aristotelism rejects the Pythagoreanism and connects philosophy with sapientia. In order to show how the differences between Ficino and Diacceto emerge, three more contemporaries are taken into consideration: Christoforo Landino, Angelo Poliziano and Giovanni (...) Pico della Mirandola. As a result of this examination, it can be said that the definition of ›philosophy‹ in Florentine renaissance Platonism tends either to Pythagoreism or to Aristotelism or to both. Closely connected with the debate on philosophy are topics and maxims such as meditatio mortis, theologia negativa, docta ignorantia, scio ne scio, nosce te ipsum, ne quid nimis et al. (shrink)

ResumenEn el marco intelectual del Renacimiento hubo una serie de pensadores que se mostraron disconformes con el aristotelismo dominante. La variedad de sus posturas así como lo distinto de sus posicionamientos filosóficos ha podido actuar como obstáculo para poder ver las similitudes que, en torno a la crítica aristotélica, presentan. El caso de Juan Luis Vives y de Gianfrancesco Pico puede resultar paradigmático, a estos se suma con fuerza Francisco Sánchez, quien dedicó una parte importante de su obra Quod nihil (...) scitur a criticar a Aristóteles, aunque más aún a sus comentaristas.Palabras claveFilosofía del Renacimiento, Francisco Sánchez, Juan Luis Vives, Gianfrancesco Pico, aristotelismo, historia de la filosofía.AbstractIn the intellectual frame of the Renaissance, there were some thinkers who did not agree with the Aristotelism prevailing at the time. The variety of their philosophical positions and opinions may have been an obstacle for an approach to their similarities regarding the Aristotelian critic. The case of Juan Luis Vives and Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola can be paradigmatic. Also Francisco Sánchez, who strongly joined their position, devoted an important part of his play Quod nihil scitur to criticize Aristotle –although he focused on his commentators above all.KeywordsPhilosophy in the Renaissance, Francisco Sanchez, Juan Luis Vives, Gianfrancesco Pico, Aristotelism, History of Philosophy. (shrink)

Smyslem článku je představit a kriticky k sobě vztáhnout Brentanovu a Husserlovu teorii abstrakce, jak je obsažena v jeho Logických zkoumáních, a z ní vycházející konceptualistické a realistické teorie obecnosti. Nejprve vycházím z rozboru Brentanova konceptualismu, a to zejména vzhledem k některým historickým inspiracím jeho teorie, jako dva možné zdroje jsem vybral Aristotelský konceptualismus a novověkou konceptualistickou pozici školy z Port-Royal. Následně se věnuji Husserlově kritice nominalismu a z ní plynoucí teorie názoru obecných entit. Zasazuji tuto nauku do všeobecnější nauky (...) o formách intencionality vědomí obecnosti v Logických zkoumáních a ukazuji, že tato nauka je nedořešená a ponechává mnoho k projasnění. Následně se vracím k Brentanovi a ukazuji, opět v souvislosti s port-royalskou teorií Antoina Arnaulda, že Brentanův konceptualismus taktéž končí ve slepé uličce. The goal of the article is to describe and critically asses Brentano's and Husserl's theories of abstraction and their ensuing theories of generality. At the beginning I describe Brentano's Conceptualism with regard to some of its historical sources, especially with regard to Aristotelism and the school of Port-Royal. I then approach Husserl's critique of Nominalism from his Logical Investigations and his theory if general intuition. I try to put the theory of general intuition into the wider context of Husserl's theory of generality in Logical Investigations in order to show a fundamental problem and a certain unclarity of this position. I then go back to Brentano to show, yet again in relation to Antoin Arnaulds theory, that Brentano's conceptualism is not tenable. (shrink)

Philosophical anthropology and philosophical biology were both very powerful and influential movements in the German academic discussion of the early 20th century. Starting with a similar conceptual background (particularly with reference to Hans Driesch’s bio-Aristotelism) they aimed at a synthetic philosophy of nature, which was supposed to include human nature into the realm of a monist description of nature itself. Within this field of biophilosophical reasoning, Jakob von Uexküll’s theory of organism and his theoretical biology hold a central place. (...) In this paper, Uexküll’s theoretical biology is reconsidered as a resumption and reformulation of a theory of knowledge from a “Kantian” provenience. Its specific structure as a generalized theory of knowledge is reconstructed and the pitfalls of a biological interpretation of the condition of the possibility of knowledge are outlined. The theory of organism is reconstructed as a centrepiece of Uexküll’sapproach. The last section of this paper presents a proposal of engineering morphology which allows the full application of Uexküll’s insights into the relativity of organismic constitution. The usefulness of functional modeling for evolutionary reconstructions on the basis of a theory of organism of uexküllian type and its relevance for biological research is evaluated. (shrink)

Philosophical anthropology and philosophical biology were both very powerful and influential movements in the German academic discussion of the early 20th century. Starting with a similar conceptual background (particularly with reference to Hans Driesch’s bio-Aristotelism) they aimed at a synthetic philosophy of nature, which was supposed to include human nature into the realm of a monist description of nature itself. Within this field of biophilosophical reasoning, Jakob von Uexküll’s theory of organism and his theoretical biology hold a central place. (...) In this paper, Uexküll’s theoretical biology is reconsidered as a resumption and reformulation of a theory of knowledge from a “Kantian” provenience. Its specific structure as a generalized theory of knowledge is reconstructed and the pitfalls of a biological interpretation of the condition of the possibility of knowledge are outlined. The theory of organism is reconstructed as a centrepiece of Uexküll’sapproach. The last section of this paper presents a proposal of engineering morphology which allows the full application of Uexküll’s insights into the relativity of organismic constitution. The usefulness of functional modeling for evolutionary reconstructions on the basis of a theory of organism of uexküllian type and its relevance for biological research is evaluated. (shrink)

Philosophical anthropology and philosophical biology were both very powerful and influential movements in the German academic discussion of the early 20th century. Starting with a similar conceptual background (particularly with reference to Hans Driesch’s bio-Aristotelism) they aimed at a synthetic philosophy of nature, which was supposed to include human nature into the realm of a monist description of nature itself. Within this field of biophilosophical reasoning, Jakob von Uexküll’s theory of organism and his theoretical biology hold a central place. (...) In this paper, Uexküll’s theoretical biology is reconsidered as a resumption and reformulation of a theory of knowledge from a “Kantian” provenience. Its specific structure as a generalized theory of knowledge is reconstructed and the pitfalls of a biological interpretation of the condition of the possibility of knowledge are outlined. The theory of organism is reconstructed as a centrepiece of Uexküll’sapproach. The last section of this paper presents a proposal of engineering morphology which allows the full application of Uexküll’s insights into the relativity of organismic constitution. The usefulness of functional modeling for evolutionary reconstructions on the basis of a theory of organism of uexküllian type and its relevance for biological research is evaluated. (shrink)

George Gemistos Plethon was a Byzantine Philosopher, who lived during the 14th and 15th centuries before the fall of the Byzantine Empire. In his writings we can find the feeling of an intense Greek identity. Also, he can be considered as a genuine neoplatonist, who played a decisive role in the controversy between Platonists and Aristotelians in his era. He took part in the Council of Florence and the Council of Ferrara (1438-1439), where he gave a course of lectures on (...) Platonic Philosophy, which was the cause for the founding of Academia Platonica by Cozimo de Medici (1459). His social and political ideas were very important and derived from an ideal for reforming the social reality of his country. But they weren’t appreciated, as he wished, in Peloponnesus, and especially in Mistra, where he lived for the most part of his life. Although his theology and ontology are based on a metaphysical determinism, the human being maintains his freedom because of the rational part of soul. Man and his soul are in a middle position between the intelligible and the sensible world. His ethics was developed on a wide theory of virtues, including the four main platonic virtues, from which derive twelve subdivisions. His anthropological, social and ethical theories belong on the neoplatonic line of thought and had a very large influence not only on Byzantium but also on the whole European culture of Renaissance. (shrink)

This work attempts to respond to Tomas Aquinas' Cosmological Argument in a way that combines Set Theory with the idea of the ‘Book of Change’. The study defines the ith Cause Set on which to operate on, which leads to the ontological commitment of austerity that the ‘First Cause's Compromise with emergence’ cannot be avoided. It is argued in the present paper that the concept that ‘emergence only consists of Synchronic Emergence and Diachronic Emergence’ should be extended to a broader (...) notion of emergence, which is made up of the two discussed elements and a third one ‘No-Boundary Emergence’ (beyond the time dimension). The article defines the concept of No-Boundary Emergence, proves why it is a type of emergence that differs from the traditional two types, and asserts that it underlies the bottom layer of the cosmos. This study describes the common feature of all emergence as communication protocols between layers. The assemblage of all emergences behaves similar to a distributed system that cannot be restricted by Gödel's theorem. The paper provides evidence (in Big Bang Cosmology, Conformal Cyclic Cosmology, Superstring Theory, Quantum Gravity) for this point of view, and notes that emergence (in the context of No-Boundary Emergence) is not only a simple scientific theory but also a progressive scientific research programme that can spontaneously grow from scientific theory based on Platonism at the expense of a degenerating shift to the ontological commitment of austerity. This paper proposes an improved model of Schrödinger Cat that provides a new explanation for quantum measurement and argues that there must be a forbidden zone of thought experiments. The study also introduces the implications of ancient Chinese thoughts (namely, the ‘Book of Change’ and Confucius). The paper comes to the conclusion that emergence (crossing the gap between ‘being’ and ‘nothing’, while ignoring the forbidden zone of thought experiments) relieves ‘cosmological insufficiency’ in the sense of Neo-Aristotelism. (shrink)

We study here the reception by their contemporaries of Antoine de Villon's and étienne de Clave's anti-Aristotelian, almost materialistic and atomistic theses, which they intended to support publicly in Paris in 1624, using (al)chemical experiments to this purpose. After surveying the intellectual context which could have then nourished an atomism based upon (al)chemical experiments, we go on to show how these theses, far from having been perceived as prominently atomistic, were condemned by the contemporaries above all because of the theological (...) implications of their provocative anti-Aristotelism. Alchemy itself was not directly implicated in the case of the theses. On the contrary, the theses were perceived as an alien body within the alchemical tradition. (shrink)

ResumenEn el marco intelectual del Renacimiento hubo una serie de pensadores que se mostraron disconformes con el aristotelismo dominante. La variedad de sus posturas así como lo distinto de sus posicionamientos filosóficos ha podido actuar como obstáculo para poder ver las similitudes que, en torno a la crítica aristotélica, presentan. El caso de Juan Luis Vives y de Gianfrancesco Pico puede resultar paradigmático, a estos se suma con fuerza Francisco Sánchez, quien dedicó una parte importante de su obra Quod nihil (...) scitur a criticar a Aristóteles, aunque más aún a sus comentaristas.Palabras claveFilosofía del Renacimiento, Francisco Sánchez, Juan Luis Vives, Gianfrancesco Pico, aristotelismo, historia de la filosofía.AbstractIn the intellectual frame of the Renaissance, there were some thinkers who did not agree with the Aristotelism prevailing at the time. The variety of their philosophical positions and opinions may have been an obstacle for an approach to their similarities regarding the Aristotelian critic. The case of Juan Luis Vives and Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola can be paradigmatic. Also Francisco Sánchez, who strongly joined their position, devoted an important part of his play Quod nihil scitur to criticize Aristotle –although he focused on his commentators above all.KeywordsPhilosophy in the Renaissance, Francisco Sanchez, Juan Luis Vives, Gianfrancesco Pico, Aristotelism, History of Philosophy. (shrink)

We study here the reception by their contemporaries of Antoine de Villon's and étienne de Clave's anti-Aristotelian, almost materialistic and atomistic theses, which they intended to support publicly in Paris in 1624, using chemical experiments to this purpose. After surveying the intellectual context which could have then nourished an atomism based upon chemical experiments, we go on to show how these theses, far from having been perceived as prominently atomistic, were condemned by the contemporaries above all because of the theological (...) implications of their provocative anti-Aristotelism. Alchemy itself was not directly implicated in the case of the theses. On the contrary, the theses were perceived as an alien body within the alchemical tradition. (shrink)

This text deals with Moshe Idel’s perspective on the connections between Maimonide’s philosophy and Abulafia’s esoteric thought. Idel analyses their thinking under the aspect of their appearance, inter-relation, and inner dynamics. Idel’s analysis reveals that Maimonide’s attempt to issue an esoteric book, one that would give back to Judaism a lost esoteric science, gave a particular impulse to the development of Jewish mysticism, and especially to the ecstatic Kabbalah. Maimonide attempted to transform philosophy into a mystic instrument of understanding the (...) secrets of the Torah. This fact determined Abulafia to re-signify the Maimonidean thought and to integrate it into a limit experience of “unio mystica”. In this context, several aspects concerning the arcanization and the super-arcanization of philosophical and mystical texts are discussed. (shrink)

Este artículo pretende realizar un repaso por la historiografía de la noción de averroísmo latino, desde los primeros trabajos de E. Renan hasta las investigaciones más recientes. Se destaca la falta de acuerdo entre las distintas posiciones y las grandes dificultades de definición que ésta categoría ha comportado para los historiadores de la filosofía durante los dos últimos siglos.

Purpose. The article is an explication of the features of the anthropological teaching of Peter Hacker in the context of analytical philosophy with consideration to the context of European philosophy within the framework of the Oxford School of ordinary language philosophy. The theoretical basis of the research is determined by the latest research in the English-language analytical philosophical tradition, rethinking the place of anthropological problems in the system of philosophical knowledge. Originality. Referring to primary sources, we reconstructed the philosophical and (...) anthropological teaching of Peter Hacker in the unity of its basic principles and theoretical and practical results. We determined philosophical origins of the key ideas of his philosophical anthropology and substantiated their originality, systematicity and logical argumentation. His philosophical position is defined as anthropological holism, synthesizing the reinterpreted ideas of Aristotle and Wittgenstein. Conclusions. Peter Hacker is the creator of the original version of Analytic Philosophical Anthropology. His anthropology is based on criticism of Cartesian dualism and physicalism, which underlie modern neurosciences and which he tries to overcome on the basis of Wittgenstein’s philosophical "logotherapy". The conceptual framework of his holistic anthropology is a rethought conceptual scheme of the Ordinary language philosophy. Hacker considers consciousness not as a separate mental reality, but one of the powers of human nature – an intellectual ability, which, along with emotional and moral, belongs to a person as an integral socio-biological being. Asserting the free will of man, the Oxford thinker criticizes various forms of determinism, especially its most common form in modern science – neurobiological determinism, which is built on false philosophical foundations. This criticism allows the modern British philosopher to build an original, systematic and logically consistent anthropological concept that asserts the immutability of the highest human values – goodness, love and happiness. (shrink)

Este artigo analisa diversos textos da obra de Tomás de Aquino relativos aostemas do conhecimento divino e das ideias divinas com o intuito de mostrar como duasinterpretações sustentadas por comentadores recentes da obra tomásica não se mantêmdiante da análise rigorosa dos textos. Uma primeira e menos radical interpretaçãosustenta haver ideias práticas distintas de cada coisa particular, enquanto que, deacordo com uma interpretação ainda mais forte, ideias em sentido estrito pertencemprimordialmente a coisas singulares. O objetivo deste artigo é mostrar que, emboraTomás (...) sustente que Deus conhece todas as coisas, inclusive os particulares, a doutrinadas ideias, tal como Tomás a concebe, tem limites muito estreitos, não permitindo opleno desenvolvimento de suas convicções de cunho aristotélico concernentes àcognoscibilidade dos particulares. (shrink)

F.A. Trendelenburg's work "Logical Investigations" influenced greatly the decline of G.W.F. Hegel's philosophy in the early 1840s. In this work Trendelenburg challenged the very foundation of Hegel's system, his speculative logic. Somewhat twenty years later two leading late Hegelians, C.L. Michelet from Berlin and K. Rosenkranz from Königsberg, replied to Trendelenburg. Their common strategy was to show that Trendelenburg owes more to Hegel than he admits. At the same time, Trendelenburg has misunderstood Hegel's dialectics and in fact fallen into the (...) standpoint of empiricism. Michelet and Rosenkranz agreed on many problems of Trendelenburg's account, but their readings of Hegel differed in several respects. For example, they were apart on I. Kant's significance for Hegel. Partly because of this, I will argue, Rosenkranz has more affinity to Trendelenburg than Michelet. The debate between the three continued until Trendelenburg's passing in 1872. (shrink)

Il volume analizza, con ampio apparato critico, il carteggio tra Heinrich Denifle e Franz Brentano. Viene riproddotta per la prima volta, e trascritta in tedesco moderno, la corrispondenza tra i due autori e, inoltre, offerta una loro traduzione in italiano. In appendice vengono riprodotti ulterori documenti inediti, di comuni amici di Denifle e di Brentano. Essi servono a inquadrare meglio il contesto.

Presentazione dei risultai di nun convegno internazionale organizzato dallo scrivente nel 2012 a Trieste, su Franz Brentano in Italia.

This article intends to examine the problematic question of the ontological status of “physical premotion,” that is, the divine motion of created free will. This idea was developed by the Dominican Báñez and was strongly criticised by the Jesuit Suárez. Suárez’s description of physical premotion shows that he gradually conditioned the debate in a way which compelled to see the premotion as an entity different from the creator and the free agent. Several texts of Suárez are also reviewed in discussion (...) with a recent study of Matava. Finally, the article concludes that Báñez follows the main lines of the thought of Aristotle and Aquinas; consequently, he does not believe that the divine motion has any other effect in the world than that of the free action of the created agent. (shrink)

In these pages, we expose the main traits of the doctrine of providence of Saint Albert the Great, according to his systematic works, mainly his Summa of Theology. His discussion follows clearly the guidelines of the Summa of Alexander of Hales, in order to delve into the set of problems faced by theological tradition over the centuries. Albert also restates the reflections of different authors like Boethius or Saint John of Damascus and he gives his personal solution to the complex (...) questions of providence, destiny and contingency of the world. (shrink)

In these pages, we expose the main traits of St. Albert the Great’s doctrine of providence and fate, considered by Palazzo the keystone of his philosophical system. To describe it we examine his systematic works, primarily his Summa of Theology. His discussion follows clearly the guidelines of the Summa of Alexander of Hales, in order to delve into the set of problems faced over the centuries by theological tradition. Albert also restates the reflections of different authors like Boethius or Saint (...) John of Damascus but, in his Summa he incorporates to his reflections also the noteworthy book of Nemesius of Emesa, De natura hominis, which includes some pages on providence. Albert gives his personal solution to the complex questions of providence, destiny and contingency of the world. His conception of providence is developed in the frame of the creative power of the almighty God. God’s knowledge is necessary and inerrant and his providential purposes are infallible, but that does not mean that every event is necessary. He does not communicate His own proprieties to the creatures. In order to understand this problem, Albert recalls the notion of hypothetical necessity coined by Boethius in an Aristotelian framework and the difference between 'necessitas consequentis' and 'necessitas consequentiae' proposed by Alexander of Hales. He also develops his account of providence, closely linked to the topic of fate. However, it would be exaggerated to deem his position deterministic. (shrink)