En este trabajo sostengo que el programa de la concordia entre Platón y Aristóteles que Pico della Mirandola desarrolla es una buena herramienta para entender, no sólo su relación con el platonismo, sino su aristotelismo. Para ello, (1) presento las aproximaciones recientes sobre el tema de la concordia entre Platón y Aristóteles en los trabajos de Pico; (2) analizo la forma en que se puede hablar del aristotelismo de Pico desde un enfoque recepcional; (3) presento el programa de (...) la concordia entre Platón y Aristóteles en la Antigüedad Tardúa y su recepción piquiana. Concluyo que el aristotelismo de Pico puede ser caracterizado como una actitud explícita de valoración positiva y como un uso de sus tesis para defender la concordia frente a los platónicos. (shrink)

El propósito en este artículo es mostrar que, a pesar del juicio lapidario de algunos estudiosos de las últimas décadas respecto del interés filosófico del bizantino Miguel de Éfeso, es posible encontrar aspectos relevantes en sus lecturas e interpretaciones de Aristóteles. Argumentaré que el comentario de Miguel al _De motu animalium_ merece ser tratado seriamente. En la medida en que Miguel a veces emplea un modelo conceptual estoico para explicar Aristóteles, propone una idea nueva sobre cómo entender la teoría aristotélica (...) de la acción. Las interpretaciones del texto aristotélico por parte de Miguel no son meras repeticiones; en algunos pasajes se advierten desarrollos que van más allá de Aristóteles, aun cuando presuponen premisas aristotélicas bastante claras. (shrink)

The author tries to expose the reception of Aristotelian philosophy among the first Greek Churchfathers, from St. Justin to the 'Refutatio'. There are some interesting points concerning the doxographical tradition, specially relating to the Aristotelian idea of God.

Nos últimos anos, cada vez mais os "ismos" estão sendo deixados de lado. Neste sentido, quando se fala de aristotelismo ou de averroísmo de Marsílio de Pádua, torna-se necessário examinar o que se entende precisamente por tais atributos e, depois, até que ponto, mesmo de forma aproximativa, eles podem ser aplicados a Marsílio.

Andrés de Guevara y Basoazábal (1748-1801), jesuita novohispano guanajuatense, escribió las Institutionum elementarium philosophiae, donde su autor ofrece un currículo deseable para la juventud mexicana que incluya la ciencia moderna empírica, la política virtuosa y la sabiduría humana. A través de una traducción comparativa del latín al español del proemio de la citada obra, este artículo pretende: 1) contextualizar al autor novohispano, 2) mostrar la recepción de la ciencia moderna desde los elementos aristotélicos de los que Guevara dispuso, y 3) (...) mostrar que la modernidad y la tradición aristotélica se enriquecieron mutuamente; y lo que debía de reformarse era la escolástica anquilosada. Se concluye que a través del proemio De vicissitundinibus de Guevara se evidencia la recepción mexicana de la modernidad emanada de una mentalidad aristotélica. (shrink)

Lineamenti di storia della scuola padovana di filosofia.--Studi recenti sull'aristotelismo italiano del Rinascimento (1958-1969).

El artículo intenta indagar la naturaleza y la peculiaridad de las obras de Alejandro de Afrodisia. Botter argumenta que, como expresión de una cultura nueva, la cultura del “comentario”, las obras de Alejandro de Afrodisia representan una forma de cultura original y diferente respecto de la idea tradicional del desarrollo de las doctrinas de los grandes Maestros del pasado. La práctica de Alejandro apunta a aclarar Aristóteles a través de Aristóteles, modelando, en la medida de lo posible, el comentario a (...) los textos originales por medio de un fatigoso trabajo filológico de confrontación de cada frase singular con todo el resto del corpus de los tratados y con las principales interpretaciones de los predecesores. Según Botter, en el corpus de los comentarios Alejandro trata de aclarar las posiciones de Aristóteles con el objetivo de facilitar la comprensión del texto mismo. El comentario no consiste, por tanto, en una simple repetición, sino en una investigación incesante del significado originario del texto detrás de las interpretaciones históricas y de las intromisiones de otros intérpretes. (shrink)

A história da filosofia no Brasil começa em 1572, quando foi inaugurado o curso de Artes dos jesuítas na cidade do Salvador, Bahia. Denominava-se “Artes” como abreviatura de “Artes liberais”, significando esta qualificação de “liberais” o caráter contemplativo ou teórico das disciplinas como uma espécie de saber considerado em sua organização e independentemente de objetos aos quais possa aplicar-se, a exemplo da Filosofia, a qual foi referida por Aristóteles como “ciência livre, pois somente esta é para si mesma” (ARISTÓTELES, Metafísica (...) I, 2, 982b). Na Bahia, o colégio instituído para ministrar tais disciplinas, e destinado à formação superior de eclesiásticos e de civis, teve como modelo o seu congênere na cidade portuguesa de Coimbra, denominado Colégio das Artes, o qual fora confiado aos jesuítas desde 1555. O curso de Artes durava três anos e abrangia, além de latim e estudos literários, as disciplinas filosóficas. Estas últimas apoiavam-se nas obras aristotélicas, segundo a Ratio Studiorum, método pedagógico da Companhia de Jesus. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.3 (2003) 414-415 [Access article in PDF] Gregorio Piaia, editor. La presenza dell'aristotelismo padovano nella filosofia della prima modernità: Atti del Colloquio internazionale in memoria di Charles B. Schmitt (Padova, 4-6 settembre 2000). Rome and Padua: Antenore, 2002. Pp. 488. Paper, € 38.00.Dedicated to the impact of Paduan Aristotelianism on early modern philosophy, this volume, edited by Gregorio Piaia, presents the proceedings (...) of a much-anticipated conference held in memory of Charles B. Schmitt at the University of Padua on September 4-6, 2000, jointly co-sponsored by Padua's Department of Philosophy, the Centro per la Storia dell'Università di Padova, the Seminar für Philosophie und Geistesgeschichte der Renaissance of the University of Munich, the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Natural Philosophy of the Catholic University of Nijmegen, and the Foundation for Intellectual History of London. It was indeed Schmitt's merit (one thinks first and foremost of The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy he edited in 1988) to have revised in the most critical and convincing way the image historians of philosophy had of Renaissance Aristotelianism as a backward-looking movement unable to express any vitality, to say nothing about its influence on later philosophers. Obviously, the Paduan Aristotelians did not achieve the same impact as Descartes and they did not produce the sharp reactions the libertins provoked. Yet, their impact was substantial, as many contributors show, with a concentration in the north of central Europe, i.e., in Germany and in Scandinavia.The volume opens with a paper by Stefano Perfetti on the physician, statesman, and philosopher Giulio Cesare Scaligero, who belongs among the Paduan Aristotelians because he received his education at Padua. The works of the "pure Aristotelian" (following the definition of this movement provided by Wilhelm Risse) Giacomo Zabarella, surely the most celebrated of the group, is the subject of papers by Francesco Bottin, Ian McLean, Sachicko Kusukawa, Daniel A. Di Liscia, Heikki Mikkeli, Merio Scattola, David A. Lines, Antonino Poppi, Paul Richard Blum, Giovanna Varani, Gregorio Piaia, and Giuseppe Micheli. They have looked into the impact of Zabarella's philosophy, logic, and theory of demonstration (the celebrated regressus) in contexts such as Lutheran Germany and Scandinavia, Reformed Germany and Holland, and Catholic Italy and France during the impressive span from the publication of Melanchthon's Dialectic in 1520 to that of Kant's Critique of Judgment in 1790. Less known today, but quite influential until 1648, was the "eclectic Aristotelian" (to use Schmitt's phrase) and colleague (and antagonist) of Zabarella, Francesco Piccolomini, whom Jill Kraye, Heikki Mikkeli, Merio Scattola, and David A. Lines consider in their papers. Piccolomini became famous for his mediation between Aristotelianism and Platonism. He revived "the soul of Aristotle and the spirit of Plato," as a contemporary said. Pierre Bayle and Jakob Brucker highlighted Piccolomini's efforts to combine Aristotelian and Platonic philosophy; and modern scholars have identified many [End Page 414] Platonizing elements in his Aristotelianism. In the hope of producing a more accurate and complete picture of eclectic Aristotelianism within the context of Renaissance moral philosophy, Jill Kraye's paper explores a neglected side of Piccolomini's ethical thought, namely his careful account of Stoicism. Finally, a group of papers with a more general scope needs to be mentioned, namely Heinrich C. Kuhn's survey of works of Paduan Aristotelians in German libraries, Charles H. Lohr's paper on the sources of Calvinist theories of science, and Ekhard Kessler's paper on the relation of logic to hermeneutics. As a last remark, of the seventeen contributions to this important volume, which no research library should be without, eight are in Italian, six in English, and three in German. Riccardo Pozzo Università di Verona... (shrink)

Este artigo discute a presença neoplatônica e aristotélica na metafísica de Ibn Gabirol. Para tanto, são confrontadas as teorias de Plotino e Gabirol, em alguns dos pontos principais, nos quais a semelhança já foi apontada: o Primeiro Princípio, o intermediário entre Deus e o mundo e a questão da matéria universal. Identificadas as diferenças entre as propostas daqueles autores quanto ao tratamento destas questões, serão apresentadas brevemente algumas contribuições que podem ter sido provenientes das obras de Aristóteles, visando esclarecer a (...) origem do tratamento conferido a estes temas por Ibn Gabirol. Acreditamos que a obra de Ibn Gabirol deva ser entendida inserida em seu contexto histórico-filosófico, que primava por ver as doutrinas de Platão e Aristóteles, não como conflitantes, mas como complementares, bem como no sentido de sua compatibilização com o criacionismo abrahâmico que, no caso, obedece ao primado judaico da dessemelhança radical entre Deus e a criação. PALAVRAS-CHAVE – Ibn Gabirol. Hilemorfismo Universal. Aristóteles. Substância. Matéria Inteligível. (shrink)

v. 1. Dal primo periodo padovano al periodo presalernitano.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.3 (2003) 414-415 [Access article in PDF] Gregorio Piaia, editor. La presenza dell'aristotelismo padovano nella filosofia della prima modernità: Atti del Colloquio internazionale in memoria di Charles B. Schmitt (Padova, 4-6 settembre 2000). Rome and Padua: Antenore, 2002. Pp. 488. Paper, € 38.00.Dedicated to the impact of Paduan Aristotelianism on early modern philosophy, this volume, edited by Gregorio Piaia, presents the proceedings (...) of a much-anticipated conference held in memory of Charles B. Schmitt at the University of Padua on September 4-6, 2000, jointly co-sponsored by Padua's Department of Philosophy, the Centro per la Storia dell'Università di Padova, the Seminar für Philosophie und Geistesgeschichte der Renaissance of the University of Munich, the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Natural Philosophy of the Catholic University of Nijmegen, and the Foundation for Intellectual History of London. It was indeed Schmitt's merit (one thinks first and foremost of The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy he edited in 1988) to have revised in the most critical and convincing way the image historians of philosophy had of Renaissance Aristotelianism as a backward-looking movement unable to express any vitality, to say nothing about its influence on later philosophers. Obviously, the Paduan Aristotelians did not achieve the same impact as Descartes and they did not produce the sharp reactions the libertins provoked. Yet, their impact was substantial, as many contributors show, with a concentration in the north of central Europe, i.e., in Germany and in Scandinavia.The volume opens with a paper by Stefano Perfetti on the physician, statesman, and philosopher Giulio Cesare Scaligero, who belongs among the Paduan Aristotelians because he received his education at Padua. The works of the "pure Aristotelian" (following the definition of this movement provided by Wilhelm Risse) Giacomo Zabarella, surely the most celebrated of the group, is the subject of papers by Francesco Bottin, Ian McLean, Sachicko Kusukawa, Daniel A. Di Liscia, Heikki Mikkeli, Merio Scattola, David A. Lines, Antonino Poppi, Paul Richard Blum, Giovanna Varani, Gregorio Piaia, and Giuseppe Micheli. They have looked into the impact of Zabarella's philosophy, logic, and theory of demonstration (the celebrated regressus) in contexts such as Lutheran Germany and Scandinavia, Reformed Germany and Holland, and Catholic Italy and France during the impressive span from the publication of Melanchthon's Dialectic in 1520 to that of Kant's Critique of Judgment in 1790. Less known today, but quite influential until 1648, was the "eclectic Aristotelian" (to use Schmitt's phrase) and colleague (and antagonist) of Zabarella, Francesco Piccolomini, whom Jill Kraye, Heikki Mikkeli, Merio Scattola, and David A. Lines consider in their papers. Piccolomini became famous for his mediation between Aristotelianism and Platonism. He revived "the soul of Aristotle and the spirit of Plato," as a contemporary said. Pierre Bayle and Jakob Brucker highlighted Piccolomini's efforts to combine Aristotelian and Platonic philosophy; and modern scholars have identified many [End Page 414] Platonizing elements in his Aristotelianism. In the hope of producing a more accurate and complete picture of eclectic Aristotelianism within the context of Renaissance moral philosophy, Jill Kraye's paper explores a neglected side of Piccolomini's ethical thought, namely his careful account of Stoicism. Finally, a group of papers with a more general scope needs to be mentioned, namely Heinrich C. Kuhn's survey of works of Paduan Aristotelians in German libraries, Charles H. Lohr's paper on the sources of Calvinist theories of science, and Ekhard Kessler's paper on the relation of logic to hermeneutics. As a last remark, of the seventeen contributions to this important volume, which no research library should be without, eight are in Italian, six in English, and three in German. Riccardo Pozzo Università di Verona... (shrink)

This article discusses neoplatonic and aristotelian presence in Ibn Gabirol metaphysics. With this aim, Plotinus and Gabirol’s are confronted in some of the main points, where the resemblance had already been pointed: the First Principle, the intermediary between God and the world and the universal matter. Once the differences between the approaches of these authors regarding such questions have been identified, some contributions which may come from the works of Aristotle will be briefly presented, in order to clarify the origin (...) of Gabirol’s ideas. We believe that Gabirol´s metaphysics must be understood in its historical-philosophical context, characterized by a view of Plato and Aristotle´s doctrines not as conflicting but complementary, as well as in its effort of harmonize them with the abrahamic creationism which, in this case, obeys the Judaic primacy of radical separation between God and the creation. KEY WORDS – Ibn Gabirol. Universal Hylemorfism. Aristotle. Substance. Intelligible Matter. (shrink)