Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  ARISTOTELISM
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
Filo-Sofija
|
2004
|
vol. 4
|
issue 4
129-140
EN
Evolution of philosophy before Aristotle aims at discovery of the proper subject of metaphysics (substance) and four causes of beings. Thomas deepens problem of causality to problem of efficient cause i.e. cause of existence of beings. The proper method is here separation. Departing from the standpoint of Aristotle, Thomas formulates his own theory of subject of metaphysics (ens inquantum est ens) but in a sense, the elements of his own theory he finds already in Aristotle. Moreover he argues against Avicenna (with whom he shares creationism) commenting on Metaphysics of Aristotle. Properly interpreted Aristotelism is then his own philosophy. And it cannot by otherwise: for discoverer of first philosophy is Aristotle.
EN
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' modification of aristotelism influenced the rise of modern science.
EN
The main ideas of Vincent Decombes' position are explained with a bit of chronology in the setting of analytic and continental philosophical traditions. The article discuses in some length the influence of Lucien Tensiere's structuralism, essentially its realistic and non-mentalist understanding of linguistic structure, on Descombes' conception. It is argued that these two features are present, on the one hand, in Descombes' ontology of 'totalities' or real systems, and on the other hand, in his non-mentalist conception of human action. The author observes that Aristotelian realism which, according to a remark of Pascal Engel is 'so long absent in French philosophical tradition', revives in the philosophy of Vincent Descombes.
EN
The medieval Christian philosophy was influenced by the translations of the writings by the ancient philosophers from Arabic into Latin. Among them was also 'Liber de causis' by Avicebron. In his commentary Albert the Great examines Avicebron's theory of universal matter and universal form, offering his own interpretation of the latter. The conclusions of the author's analysis of the Albert's commentary are as follows: 1. In Albert's commentary the theory of Avicebron is not represented adequately. 2. Albert's objections against Avicebron's theory are not identical with his approach to Platonism in general. 3. Dividing philosophers into two groups, Platonists and Aristotelians, as usually found in contemporary analyses, can not be applied when analyzing Albert's commentary, while the two approaches differ substantially.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.