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

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Categories
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Aristotle’s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories

100%
Militello C.
Peitho. Examina Antiqua
|
2014
|
vol. 5
|
issue 1
91-118
EN
This paper lists and examines the explicit references to Aristotle’s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic commentaries on the Categories. The references to the Topics by Porphyry, Dexippus, Ammonius, Simplicius, Olympiodorus, Philoponus and David (Elias) are listed according the usual prolegomena to Aristotle’s works. In particular, the paper reconstructs David (Elias)’s original thesis about the proponents of the title Pre-Topics for the Categories and compares Ammonius’, Simplicius’ and Olympiodorus’ doxographies about the postpraedicamenta. Moreover, the study identifies two general trends. The first one is that all the commentators after Proclus share the same general view about: the authenticity of the Topics, Aristotle’s writing style in them, the part of philosophy to which they belong, their purpose, their usefulness and their place in the reading order. The second one is that whereas Porphyry, Dexippus and Simplicius use the Topics as an aid to understanding the Categories, Ammonius, Olympiodorus and David (Elias) do not.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

The Practice of ὀνοματοποιεῖν: Some Peculiar Statements in the Ancient Neoplatonic Commentators on Aristotle

100%
Granata D.
Peitho. Examina Antiqua
|
2016
|
vol. 7
|
issue 1
217-228
EN
This paper shows the role of ὀνοματοποιεῖν in Neoplatonism and how this practice is ruled by an onto-logical canon. While ὀνοματοποιεῖν itself means the making of a brand new name, its usage is manifold. As Aristotle explains in Rh. III 2, poets take advantage of ὀνοματοποιεῖν to catch the undefined and give it a recognisable image, by means of a metaphorical name. In science, this practice, codified by Aristotle, is twofold: ὀνοματοποιεῖν meant both to re-semanticize words wellknown and to create names ex novo for things not discovered or studied yet. After analysing ὀνοματοποιεῖν’s recurrence in Aristotle, I illustrate that, according to Neoplatonic Commentators, impositio can be, both natural and technical, only of things in actuality, having a solid consistency. Intermediates between contraries, presumed relatives and powers as qualities are nameless – as  Philoponus notices in his In Categorias – since they haven’t an independent status and aren’t  definable. This bond between the original rhetorical practice and the ontological perspective, sketched in Int. 1, was strengthened by Alexander, who filled Aristotle’s gaps, stating that names signify things’ being, i.e. the form acquired in actuality.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Minglitan: Chinese Translation and Commentary of Aristotle’s Categories from the 17th Century

99%
Rogacz D.
Peitho. Examina Antiqua
|
2016
|
vol. 7
|
issue 1
273-284
EN
This article puts forth the first Polish translation of fragments of Minglitan,„Investigation into the Meaning of Names”, that is Chinese translationand commentary of Aristotle’s Categories prepared by Chinesescholar, Li Zhizao and Portuguese Jesuit, Francisco Furtado, andpublished in 1631. Five pieces have been select for the translation:Li Tianjing’s preface to Minglitan; a groundbreaking essay on sourcesof philosophy, containing the very first Chinese transliteration of theterm φιλοσοφία; chapter on the category of substance; of quantity; andchapter on opposites. The translation has been furnished with footnoteselaborating on Chinese terms employed in the Minglitan, and hasbeen preceded by an introduction that delineates historical context ofMinglitan, its content and structure, along with a brief sketch of its mainlinguistic determinants.
PL
This article puts forth the first Polish translation of fragments of Minglitan, „Investigation into the Meaning of Names”, that is Chinese translation and commentary of Aristotle’s Categories prepared by Chinese scholar, Li Zhizao and Portuguese Jesuit, Francisco Furtado, and published in 1631. Five pieces have been select for the translation: Li Tianjing’s preface to Minglitan; a groundbreaking essay on sources of philosophy, containing the very first Chinese transliteration of the term φιλοσοφία; chapter on the category of substance; of quantity; and chapter on opposites. The translation has been furnished with footnotes elaborating on Chinese terms employed in the Minglitan, and has been preceded by an introduction that delineates historical context of Minglitan, its content and structure, along with a brief sketch of its main linguistic determinants.
4
Content available remote

Aristoteles a ontologický status ľudskej reči v "Kategóriách"

86%
Labuda P.
Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)
|
2019
|
vol. 67
|
issue 6
877-894
EN
The subject of this paper is the issue of human speech in Aristotle, especially in his work Categories. Its primary goal is to elaborate an interpretation of Aristotle’s statements about human speech as a quantity (Cat. 4b20–b39, 5a15–b2) that would allow them to fit reasonably into the whole of Aristotle’s theory of language. The structure of the paper is as follows. In the first part a certain approach to the question of the reconstruction of Aristotle’s theory of language is proposed. The second part, by means of the introduction of the criteria of separability and ontological priority of the first substance, creates a framework for the subsequent analysis of the two basic classifications, which constitute the main theme of Categories. The third part supplies its own interpretation of the ontological status of human speech in the context of the classification schemes in Categories, and this, in the fourth part, is inserted into the greater whole of Aristotle’s theory of language.
SK
Predmetom analýzy v tejto stati je problematika ľudskej reči u Aristotela, špeciálne v jeho diele Kategórie. Hlavným cieľom práce je vypracovanie takého výkladu Aristotelových vyjadrení o ľudskej reči ako o kvantite (Kategórie 4b20–b39, 5a15–b2), ktorý by zmysluplne zapadal do celku Aristotelovej teórie jazyka. Štruktúra práce je nasledovná. V prvej časti je navrhnutý určitý prístup k otázke rekonštrukcie Aristotelovej teórie jazyka. Druhá časť si pomocou predstavenia kritérií separability a ontologickej priority prvej substancie vytvára rámec pre následnú analýzu dvoch základných klasifikácií, ktoré sú nosnou témou diela Kategórie. Tretia časť poskytuje vlastný výklad ontologického statusu ľudskej reči v kontexte klasifikačných schém diela Kategórie, a tento výklad je v záverečnej, štvrtej časti state zasadený do celku Aristotelovej teórie jazyka.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Koinon and koinônia: A Particular Case of Participation in John Philoponus

86%
Granata D.
Peitho. Examina Antiqua
|
2018
|
vol. 9
|
issue 1
101-120
EN
The aim of this study is to discuss an original philosophical contribution made by Philoponus, who in In Cat. 18, 14–22 equates koinon in its most peculiar meaning with the concept of koinônia understood as a particu­lar case of Platonic methexis. First, the paper analyzes the passages where the Neoplatonic commentators of the Categories distinguish four distinct meanings of the Aristotelian concept of koinon. Subsequently, this article emphasizes the differences between Philoponus’ herme­neutical suggestions and those of the other commentators. Philopo­nus clarifies that while every koinon is methekton, Aristotle’s koinon is characterized by the fact that the participation is ex isou and kata meros. Thus, koinônia, according to Philoponus, is a particular case of methexis, where everyone participating in something participates in it equally and singly. The example cited by Philoponus to explain Aristotle’s koinon is that of men participating equally and singly in human nature. The study concludes with a discussion of the relationship among the concepts of koinon, koinônia and methexis.
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.