Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Humbert de Preuilly, mort en 1296, a fait ses études au Collège de Saint Bernard à Paris. Il est l’auteur d’un commentaire sur les Sentences de Pierre Lombard, transmis par 46 manuscrits. Il est également l’auteur d’un commentaire intégral de la Métaphysique d’Aristote. Ce commentaire, jusqu’ici négligé, est particulièrement intéressant car Humbert commente Aristote sur la base d’une synthèse des interprétations d’Averroès, d’Albert le Grand et de Thomas d’Aquin. Dans ce volume est édité le commentaire des livres I-V. L’introduction au volume donne une brève présentation du texte, retrace la tradition manuscrite et présente la pensée métaphysique d’Humbert de Preuilly.

Aristotle --- Aristotle.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Aristotle. - Metaphysics

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

In this annotated critical edition of Aristotle’s Metaphysics Lambda Stefan Alexandru explores and utilizes for the first time numerous previously neglected textual sources, written in Greek, Latin, Arabic, and Hebrew. The twelfth book of the Metaphysics , originally an independent treatise, is crucial for the understanding of Aristotle’s philosophy, primarily because the doctrine of the Unmoved Mover is nowhere else set forth in greater detail. Not only all the forty-two formerly known Greek codices have been collated, but also commentaries and translations. Moreover, a hitherto undiscovered, independent manuscript, representing a tenuous and particularly valuable branch of the direct tradition, is minutely investigated. The document in question, preserved in the Vatican, is an autograph of the Byzantine humanist and Ecumenical Patriarch Gennadios II Scholarios.

Aristotle. --- Aristotle --- Manuscripts. --- Biblioteca apostolica vaticana. --- Aristotle. - Metaphysics. - Book 12

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Die vorliegende Arbeit besteht aus drei Studien. In der ersten Studie unternimmt der Autor den Versuch einer hypothetischen Auslegung, wie Aristoteles die zweiten Substanzen und die Universalien interpretiert haben könnte. Im Fokus wird dabei von Seiten des Autors der Frage nachgegangen, ob Aristoteles als Entdecker der Universalien gelten kann und welchen Platz er den Universalien zuweisen könnte. In der zweiten Studie begibt sich der Autor auf das spannende Terrain der aristotelischen Theorie der Substanz und versucht auf diesem Terrain teilweise neue und gewagte Ansätze zu elaborieren. Die interpretatorischen Anstrengungen gelten hier vor allem dem Versuch eines Nachweises einer eventuell vorliegenden konstitutiven Mehrwertigkeit des Konzeptes der Substanz bei Aristoteles. Darüber hinaus verortet der Autor eine gewisse Kontinuität in der Interpretation, welche Aristoteles in seinen Schriften vom Konzept der Substanz verfolgt. In der dritten Studie liegt das Hauptaugenmerk des Autors auf der Gegenüberstellung zwischen der Interpretation der ontologischen Bedingungen für die Synonymie bei Aristoteles und der Deutung der ontologischen Bedingungen für die Nicht-Homonymie in dem von platonischen Auffassungen beeinflussten Argument aus den Bezüglichen (Relativa). «In conclusion, the book offers a clear, ambitious, and convincing interpretation of a central point of Aristotle's philosophy.» (Nicola Carraro, PHILÓSOPHOS, Vol.23, No.1/2018 FULL REVIEW)

Logic, Ancient. --- Metaphysics. --- Aristotle --- Aristotle. --- Language.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

"The earlier partof the commentary by 'Philoponus' on Aristotle's On the Soul is translated by William Charlton in another volume in the series. This volume includes the latter part of the commentary along with a translation of Stephanus' commentary on Aristotle's On Interpretation. It thus enables readers to assess for themselves Charlton's view that the commentary once ascribed to Philoponus should in fact be ascribed to Stephanus. The two treatises of Aristotle here commented on are very different from each other. In On Interpretation Aristotle studies the logic of opposed pairs of statements. It is in this context that Aristotle discusses the nature of language and the implications for determinism of opposed predictions about a future occurrence, such as a sea-battle. And Stephanus, like his predecessor Ammonius, brings in other deterministic arguments not considered by Aristotle ('The Reaper' and the argument from God's foreknowledge). In On the Soul 3.9-13, Aristotle introduces a theory of action and motivation and sums up the role of perception in animal life. Despite the differences in subject matter between the two texts, Charlton is able to make a good case for Stephanus' authorship of both commentaries. He also sees Stephanus as preserving what was valuable from Ammonius' earlier commentary On Interpretation, while bringing to bear the virtue of greater concision. At the same time, Stephanus reveals his Christian affiliations, in contrast to Ammonius, his pagan predecessor."--Bloomsbury Publishing.

Determinism (Philosophy). --- Determinism (Philosophy). --- Soul --- Soul --- Philosophy. --- Philosophy. --- Aristotle. --- Aristotle. --- De anima (Aristotle). --- De interpretatione (Aristotle).