{"title":"From Focal Homonymy to the Ambiguity of Existence (tashkīk al-wujūd): Avicenna’s Reception and Revision of Aristotle’s Categorial Ontology","authors":"Zachary Candy","doi":"10.1163/18778372-12340027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis paper argues that both Aristotle’s theory of the so-called focal homonymy of “being” and Avicenna’s corresponding theory of the ambiguity of “existence” (tashkīk al-wujūd) are meant to address the same dilemma of categorial ontology, but by recourse to different solutions. Avicenna retains Aristotle’s concerns but rejects his solution of focal homonymy, offering a new theory which more satisfactorily addresses each horn of the dilemma. This reading departs from prior scholarship, which, taking Avicenna to have adopted the focal theory basically intact from his Late Antique predecessors, instead tends to privilege the theory’s (peripheral) theological applications.","PeriodicalId":43744,"journal":{"name":"Oriens","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oriens","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18778372-12340027","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
This paper argues that both Aristotle’s theory of the so-called focal homonymy of “being” and Avicenna’s corresponding theory of the ambiguity of “existence” (tashkīk al-wujūd) are meant to address the same dilemma of categorial ontology, but by recourse to different solutions. Avicenna retains Aristotle’s concerns but rejects his solution of focal homonymy, offering a new theory which more satisfactorily addresses each horn of the dilemma. This reading departs from prior scholarship, which, taking Avicenna to have adopted the focal theory basically intact from his Late Antique predecessors, instead tends to privilege the theory’s (peripheral) theological applications.
从焦点同义到存在的歧义(tashk k al-wujūd):阿维森纳对亚里士多德范畴本体论的接受与修正
本文认为,亚里士多德的所谓“存在”的焦点同一性理论和阿维森纳相应的“存在”的模糊性理论(tashk k al-wujūd)都是为了解决同样的范畴本体论困境,但求助于不同的解决方案。阿维森纳保留了亚里士多德的关注,但拒绝了他的焦点同音的解决方案,提供了一个新的理论,更令人满意地解决了每个角的困境。这种解读偏离了先前的学术研究,认为阿维森纳采用了焦点理论,基本上完好无损地从他的晚期古代前辈那里得到,相反,倾向于特权理论的(外围)神学应用。
期刊介绍:
Oriens is dedicated to extending our knowledge of intellectual history and developments in the rationalist disciplines in Islamic civilization, with a special emphasis on philosophy, theology, and science. These disciplines had a profoundly rich and lasting life in Islamic civilization and often interacted in complex ways--from the period of their introduction to Islamic civilization in the translation movement that began in the eighth century, through the early and classical periods of development, to the post-classical age, when they shaped even such disciplines as legal theory and poetics. The journal''s range extends from the early and classical to the early modern periods (ca. 700-1900 CE) and it engages all regions and languages of Islamic civilization. In the tradition of Hellmut Ritter, who founded Oriens in 1948, the central focus of interest of the journal is on the medieval and early modern periods of the Near and Middle East. Within this framework, the opening up of the sources and the pursuit of philological and historical research based on original source material is the main concern of its editors and contributors. In addition to individual articles, Oriens welcomes proposals for thematic volumes within the series.