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:  William of Ockham
help Sort By:

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

Tomasz z Akwinu i William Ockham o celowości świata natury

100%
Majcherek K.
Rocznik Tomistyczny
|
2016
|
vol. 5
277-289
EN
The article presents an outline of comparison between two medieval conceptions of teleological directedness of nature, the authors of which are Thomas Aquinas and William of Ockham. The author claims that Ockham’s philosophy can – at least to some degree – be seen as a step towards those of modern theories which reject any influence of final causality upon non-rational entities. In this respect it differs substantially from Aquinas’s conception, which can legitimately be called a “cosmic teleology”, covering the Universe as a whole and all its parts.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Gilson on Dogmatism

100%
Nnamdi Konye M.
Studia Gilsoniana
|
2016
|
vol. 5
|
issue 2
307-326
EN
The article aims at uncovering reasons why philosophy may become conducive to dogmatism which inevitably leads to the failure of philosophy. In the light of Gilson’s considerations contained in his The Unity of Philosophical Experience, the author concludes that philosophy is always exposed to the influence of dogmatism when it is done from a non-philosophical standpoint. For each time when the engagement in the philosophical enterprise is driven by non-philosophical needs, it is usually the case that the goal of philosophy is misconstrued as merely that of providing an instrumental ontology to non-philosophical areas of knowledge. To avoid such mistakes as logicism, theologism or psychologism, philosophy must recover its proper object that is the real world of persons and things, and its proper method that is metaphysics.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Philosophie des Mittelalters: Eine Einführung by Hannes Möhle

80%
Welter B.
Studia Gilsoniana
|
2020
|
vol. 9
|
issue 1
191-197
EN
This paper is a review of the book: Hannes Möhle, Philosophie des Mittelalters: Eine Einführung (Berlin: Springer, 2019). The author highlights that Möhle’s book (1) examines a range of key medieval philosophical issues, and illustrates how philosophy stood separately from theology even while heavily influenced by Church and theological matters, and (2) provides readers with a better grounding in many of the longstanding or urgent concerns of medieval philosophy from the perspective of some of the era’s central thinkers.
4
Content available remote

Přirozená subjektivní práva mezi středověkem a novověkem

51%
Šejvl M.
Právník. Teoretický časopis pro otázky státu a práva (The Lawyer - Scientific Review for Problems of State and Law)
|
2017
|
vol. 156
|
issue 5
416-452
EN
This article focuses on different conceptions of natural rights in scholars of the high Middle Ages (Henry of Ghent,Duns Scotus, Ockham,Marsilius of Padua,Gerson, Summenhart) and of early Modernity (Vitoria, Suárez,Grotius). First the opinions of these scholars’ on natural law are presented, then their „definitions“ of ius as right, their use of permissive natural law and finally their conceptions of natural rights are analysed (natural right to private property is used to demonstrate the last point). Instead of the „dividing line“ between medieval and modern ideas on natural rights the paper argues for the continuity that lies in the fact that the same or similar concepts are reinterpreted and used to build new theoretical constructions. It tries to show that various natural „rights“ (in Henry of Ghent, Marsilius of Padua and William of Ockham) are in fact Hohfeldian liberties and not Hohfeldian claims and in this sense they are not rights. It criticizes the thesis which is still common (at least in the Czech and Slovak literature) that natural rights theories were triggered by the development of metaphysical nominalism and voluntarism in the high Middle Ages. Instead it tries to find reasons for the development of particular natural rights theories in various ways the scholars reacted on the particular problems of their times.
CS
Tento článek se pokouší zmapovat různé názory na přirozená práva myslitelů vrcholného středověku (Jindřich z Gentu, Duns Scotus, Ockham, Marsilius z Padovy, Gerson, Summenhart) a raného novověku (Vitoria, Suárez,Grotius) tak, že nejdříve představí jejich názory na přirozené objektivní právo, jejich vymezení ius jakožto subjektivního práva, operace s permisivním přirozeným objektivním právem a konečně jejich koncepce přirozených práv (k jejichž demonstraci používá především právo na soukromé vlastnictví). Místo někdy postulovaného předělu mezi středověkem a novověkem ukazuje naopak kontinuitu v názorech, která podle autora spočívá v tom, že často stejné či podobné koncepty jsou různými autory reinterpretovány a použity v nových kontextech. Ukazuje, že přirozená „práva“ u některých myslitelů (Jindřich z Gentu,Marsilius, Ockham) nejsou hohfeldovskými nároky (claims), a tedy subjektivními právy, ale hohfeldovskými volnostmi (liberties). Kritizuje také (minimálně v tuzemské literatuře převládající) tradiční přístup hledající spojitost mezi koncepcemi přirozených práv a nástupem metafyzického nominalismu či voluntarismu. Naopak hledá důvody pro partikulární rozvinutí koncepce přirozených práv v tom, jak zde představení myslitelé reagují na problémy, které před ně postavila doba, v níž žili.
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.