Students, masters, and ‘heterodox’ doctrines at the Parisian Faculty of Arts in the 1270s

IF 0.3 2区 哲学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales Pub Date : 2009-06-30 DOI:10.2143/RTPM.76.1.2037161
L. Bianchi
{"title":"Students, masters, and ‘heterodox’ doctrines at the Parisian Faculty of Arts in the 1270s","authors":"L. Bianchi","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.76.1.2037161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A few years ago, Malcolm de Mowbray argued that nearly everything that had been written concerning the origins of the condemnation issued on March 7, 1277 by the bishop of Paris, Stephen Tempier, was based on the unproven assumption that what motivated the condemnation were provocative doctrines taught by university (especially Arts) masters; in contrast, de Mowbray maintained that the sources of the prohibited views were not the Arts masters, but students who uttered them in the course of «their disputations». The present article discusses the historiographical and methodological background of de Mowbray's interpretation, provides evidence of the involvement of full-fledged masters in the dissemination of the prohibited doctrines, and examines the meaning of some controversial expressions and passages found in Tempier's prefatory letter (specifically: studentes in artibus, quasi dubitabiles in scolis tractare et disputare presumunt, ut eis nesciant respondere).","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"66 2 1","pages":"75-109"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.76.1.2037161","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

A few years ago, Malcolm de Mowbray argued that nearly everything that had been written concerning the origins of the condemnation issued on March 7, 1277 by the bishop of Paris, Stephen Tempier, was based on the unproven assumption that what motivated the condemnation were provocative doctrines taught by university (especially Arts) masters; in contrast, de Mowbray maintained that the sources of the prohibited views were not the Arts masters, but students who uttered them in the course of «their disputations». The present article discusses the historiographical and methodological background of de Mowbray's interpretation, provides evidence of the involvement of full-fledged masters in the dissemination of the prohibited doctrines, and examines the meaning of some controversial expressions and passages found in Tempier's prefatory letter (specifically: studentes in artibus, quasi dubitabiles in scolis tractare et disputare presumunt, ut eis nesciant respondere).
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
1270年代巴黎艺术学院的学生、硕士和“异端”学说
几年前,马尔科姆·德·莫布雷(Malcolm de Mowbray)认为,几乎所有关于1277年3月7日巴黎主教斯蒂芬·坦皮尔(Stephen Tempier)发出的谴责的起源的文章,都是基于一个未经证实的假设,即引发谴责的是大学(尤其是艺术)硕士教授的挑衅性教义;相反,莫布雷坚持认为,被禁止的观点的来源不是艺术大师,而是学生在“他们的争论”过程中说出这些观点。本文讨论了莫布雷解释的史学和方法论背景,提供了成熟的大师参与传播被禁止的教义的证据,并检查了Tempier的序言信中发现的一些有争议的表达和段落的含义(特别是:学生在artibus,在scolis tractare和有争议的假设中,但他们是无知的回应者)。
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie Médiévales / Forschungen zur Theologie und Philosophie des Mittelalters (formerly Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale of the Abbaye Mont César) provides a forum for original, high-quality research on all aspects of theology and philosophy from Augustine and the Early Middle Ages up to late scholasticism. Recent articles have included highly focused studies on particular facets of the medieval philosophical or theological tradition, broader reconsiderations of received views in the history of medieval theology and philosophy, and editions of texts and manuscript studies.
期刊最新文献
Adam of Bocfeld or Roger Bacon? New remarks on a commentary on the Book of Causes Koinzidenz der Gegensätze und Voluntarisierung Gottes Trinitarian Theology, Authority, and Fideism [Book review] Zur Meister Eckhart-Rezeption im Spätmittelalter LE PROLOGUE DE LA LECTVRA IN ETHICAM VETEREM DU «COMMENTAIRE DE PARIS» (1235-1240) INTRODUCTION ET TEXTE CRITIQUE
×
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