Avicenna and his Sources: Alexander of Aphrodisias and Themistius (Part 1)

Meline Costa Sousa
{"title":"Avicenna and his Sources: Alexander of Aphrodisias and Themistius (Part 1)","authors":"Meline Costa Sousa","doi":"10.5380/dp.v18i1-ev.90325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article is part of a more significant investigation on Avicenna and his Late Antique sources. It aims to discuss the relation between Avicenna, Alexander of Aphrodisias, and Themistius from their theory about the intellect. Nowadays, there is a long debate among the scholars concerning Avicenna’s noetic theory. One of its issues is the nature of the agent intellect, and its relationship to the human intellect. However, since it is a difficult subject, the following lines are the first part of this investigation. They will be restricted to a general introduction to those three interpretations of the productive (or agent) intellect’s nature. One finds an analysis of the relation between Avicenna and his Late Antique sources based on the strict association (sometimes a strong dependence) of Avicenna’s theory with Alexander’s and Themistius’ ones. Thus, I will discuss their interpretation of Aristotle’s De anima 430a10-25 concerning the description and distinction of the intellects. Then, I will indicate some difficulties related to this strict association.","PeriodicalId":34455,"journal":{"name":"DoisPontos","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DoisPontos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5380/dp.v18i1-ev.90325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article is part of a more significant investigation on Avicenna and his Late Antique sources. It aims to discuss the relation between Avicenna, Alexander of Aphrodisias, and Themistius from their theory about the intellect. Nowadays, there is a long debate among the scholars concerning Avicenna’s noetic theory. One of its issues is the nature of the agent intellect, and its relationship to the human intellect. However, since it is a difficult subject, the following lines are the first part of this investigation. They will be restricted to a general introduction to those three interpretations of the productive (or agent) intellect’s nature. One finds an analysis of the relation between Avicenna and his Late Antique sources based on the strict association (sometimes a strong dependence) of Avicenna’s theory with Alexander’s and Themistius’ ones. Thus, I will discuss their interpretation of Aristotle’s De anima 430a10-25 concerning the description and distinction of the intellects. Then, I will indicate some difficulties related to this strict association.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
阿维森纳和他的来源:阿佛洛狄亚的亚历山大和忒弥斯(上)
这篇文章是对阿维森纳和他的晚期古董资料更有意义的调查的一部分。本文旨在从阿维森纳、阿佛洛狄西亚斯的亚历山大和忒米修斯的智慧理论出发,探讨他们之间的关系。目前,学术界对阿维森纳的思维理论存在着长期的争论。其中一个问题是智能体的本质,以及它与人类智能的关系。然而,由于这是一个困难的主题,以下几行是本调查的第一部分。他们将被限制在对生产性(或行为人)智力本质的三种解释的一般介绍。人们发现,根据阿维森纳的理论与亚历山大和忒米修斯的理论之间的严格联系(有时是强烈依赖),对阿维森纳和他的晚期古代资料之间的关系进行了分析。因此,我将讨论他们对亚里士多德关于描述和区分知识分子的《论人类》的解释。然后,我将指出与这种严格联系有关的一些困难。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sobre o conatus de Thomas Hobbes e as artes retóricas Hobbes e a segurança Inveja em Hobbes: Leviatã como rei dos soberbos “Hoy en muchos lugares hay mujeres que tienen el poder supremo” – Thomas Hobbes y las amazonas Soberania e concepção do público no advento do Estado moderno: uma comparação entre os modelos de Jean Bodin e Thomas Hobbes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1