Pub Date : 2018-01-01DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.85.1.3284826
D. Calma
{"title":"Adam of Bocfeld or Roger Bacon? New remarks on a commentary on the Book of Causes","authors":"D. Calma","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.85.1.3284826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.85.1.3284826","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"18 1","pages":"71-108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79461935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-01DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.83.1.3154585
Isabelle Mandrella
{"title":"Koinzidenz der Gegensätze und Voluntarisierung Gottes","authors":"Isabelle Mandrella","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.83.1.3154585","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.83.1.3154585","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80062450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-01-01DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.81.2.3062084
Mikko Posti
{"title":"Trinitarian Theology, Authority, and Fideism [Book review]","authors":"Mikko Posti","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.81.2.3062084","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.81.2.3062084","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"2 3-4","pages":"369-385"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72627159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2010-06-30DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050375
F. J. Kok
Recent investigations into the relationship between the questions on the Metaphysics authored by Marsilius of Inghen, on the one hand, and John Buridan, on the other, have revealed interesting doctrinal contrasts between them. The present article extends these investigations by examining the metaphysical question of whether we have a natural capacity for knowing God. Even though Marsilius followed Buridan's reasoning to a great extent, he disagreed with his main point: that our intellect has the natural capacity for abstracting an absolute, simple, essential concept of God from his effects. The disagreement is rooted in their differing conceptions of what an absolute concept of God entails, viz. Buridan's strictly philosophical conception vis-a-vis Marsilius' more theological conception.
{"title":"What Can we Know About God? John Buridan and Marsilius of Inghen on the Intellect's Natural Capacity for Knowing God's Essence","authors":"F. J. Kok","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050375","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050375","url":null,"abstract":"Recent investigations into the relationship between the questions on the Metaphysics authored by Marsilius of Inghen, on the one hand, and John Buridan, on the other, have revealed interesting doctrinal contrasts between them. The present article extends these investigations by examining the metaphysical question of whether we have a natural capacity for knowing God. Even though Marsilius followed Buridan's reasoning to a great extent, he disagreed with his main point: that our intellect has the natural capacity for abstracting an absolute, simple, essential concept of God from his effects. The disagreement is rooted in their differing conceptions of what an absolute concept of God entails, viz. Buridan's strictly philosophical conception vis-a-vis Marsilius' more theological conception.","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"29 1","pages":"137-171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2010-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91128001","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2010-06-30DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050371
Irene Zavattero
The article offers an edition of the prologue to the Lectura in Ethicam ueterem of the so-called «Commentary of Paris». This is one of six surviving commentaries on the first three books of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics translated into Latin by Burgundio of Pisa. The «Commentary of Paris» was probably composed around 1235-1240 by an anonymous master of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Paris. The prologue survives in one manuscript from the Abbey St.-Martial of Limoges and describes the purpose of moral philosophy. This science is necessary for human beings since it enables them to acquire virtues and directs the practical intellect, which comprises two parts: a superior part, which is always oriented toward the good, and an inferior one, which needs ethics in order to reach its perfection.
{"title":"LE PROLOGUE DE LA LECTVRA IN ETHICAM VETEREM DU «COMMENTAIRE DE PARIS» (1235-1240) INTRODUCTION ET TEXTE CRITIQUE","authors":"Irene Zavattero","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050371","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050371","url":null,"abstract":"The article offers an edition of the prologue to the Lectura in Ethicam ueterem of the so-called «Commentary of Paris». This is one of six surviving commentaries on the first three books of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics translated into Latin by Burgundio of Pisa. The «Commentary of Paris» was probably composed around 1235-1240 by an anonymous master of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Paris. The prologue survives in one manuscript from the Abbey St.-Martial of Limoges and describes the purpose of moral philosophy. This science is necessary for human beings since it enables them to acquire virtues and directs the practical intellect, which comprises two parts: a superior part, which is always oriented toward the good, and an inferior one, which needs ethics in order to reach its perfection.","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"60 1","pages":"1-33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2010-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80728519","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2010-06-30DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050372
S. Williams
There are two general routes that Augustine suggests in De Trinitate, XV, 14-16, 23-25, for a psychological account of the Father’s intellectual generation of the Word. Thomas Aquinas and Henry of Ghent, in their own ways, follow the first route; John Duns Scotus follows the second. Aquinas, Henry, and Scotus’s psychological accounts entail different theological opinions. For example, Aquinas (but neither Henry nor Scotus) thinks that the Father needs the Word to know the divine essence. If we compare the theological views entailed by their psychologies we find a trajectory from Aquinas, through Henry, and ending with Scotus. This theological trajectory falsifies a judgment that every Augustinian psychology of the divine persons amounts to a pre-Nicene functional Trinitarianism. This study makes clear how one’s awareness of the theological views entailed by these psychologies enables one to assess more thoroughly psychological accounts of the identity and distinction of the divine persons.
{"title":"AUGUSTINE, THOMAS AQUINAS, HENRY OF GHENT, AND JOHN DUNS SCOTUS: ON THE THEOLOGY OF THE FATHER'S INTELLECTUAL GENERATION OF THE WORD","authors":"S. Williams","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050372","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050372","url":null,"abstract":"There are two general routes that Augustine suggests in De Trinitate, XV, 14-16, 23-25, for a psychological account of the Father’s intellectual generation of the Word. Thomas Aquinas and Henry of Ghent, in their own ways, follow the first route; John Duns Scotus follows the second. Aquinas, Henry, and Scotus’s psychological accounts entail different theological opinions. For example, Aquinas (but neither Henry nor Scotus) thinks that the Father needs the Word to know the divine essence. If we compare the theological views entailed by their psychologies we find a trajectory from Aquinas, through Henry, and ending with Scotus. This theological trajectory falsifies a judgment that every Augustinian psychology of the divine persons amounts to a pre-Nicene functional Trinitarianism. This study makes clear how one’s awareness of the theological views entailed by these psychologies enables one to assess more thoroughly psychological accounts of the identity and distinction of the divine persons.","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"93 1","pages":"35-81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2010-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83178539","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2010-06-30DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050374
Mikhail Khorkov
Two major challenges in the study of the 14th- and 15th-century reception of Eckhart's German sermon Beati pauperes spiritu have centered on an anonymous Latin translation of this sermon (Ms. Koblenz, Landeshauptarchiv, Abt. 701, Nr. 149, fols. 7v-10v). Specifically these challenges are to explain (1) the absence in the Latin translation of the term beatitudo (frequently used by Aquinas and Eckhart) and (2) the use of the term aeterna felicitas as the Latin rendering of the medieval German word saelicheit. The latter rendering in particular is typical of the writings of Nicholas of Cusa and is of great importance for his interpretation of Eckhart's thought.
{"title":"Zur Meister Eckhart-Rezeption im Spätmittelalter","authors":"Mikhail Khorkov","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050374","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.77.1.2050374","url":null,"abstract":"Two major challenges in the study of the 14th- and 15th-century reception of Eckhart's German sermon Beati pauperes spiritu have centered on an anonymous Latin translation of this sermon (Ms. Koblenz, Landeshauptarchiv, Abt. 701, Nr. 149, fols. 7v-10v). Specifically these challenges are to explain (1) the absence in the Latin translation of the term beatitudo (frequently used by Aquinas and Eckhart) and (2) the use of the term aeterna felicitas as the Latin rendering of the medieval German word saelicheit. The latter rendering in particular is typical of the writings of Nicholas of Cusa and is of great importance for his interpretation of Eckhart's thought.","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"133 1","pages":"125-136"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2010-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77770715","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-12-31DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.76.2.2045807
Declan Lawell
This article presents for the first time a critical edition of a minor treatise named Spectacula contemplationis or The Spectacles of Contemplation by Thomas Gallus. The treatise's aim is to describe the various levels of knowledge that are traversed by the soul in its ascent to God. By the author's own admission, the treatise is inspired by the six types of contemplation listed by Richard of St Victor in his work on contemplation, Benzamin maior. Gallus's treatment however is not just a repetition of the material covered by his fellow Victorine. Though short in length, the treatise reveals some original developments and major points of divergence from Richard's intellectual approach, which reflect the affective Dionysianism of the Abbot of Vercelli. It also calls to mind features of Hugh of St Victor's De tribus diebus and Bonaventure's Itinerarium mentis in Deum, as well as revealing the previously neglected fact that Gallus may have been the author of, or at least wrote a commentary on, a sequence entitled Super mentem exultemus.
{"title":"SPECTACULA CONTEMPLATIONIS (1244-46): A TREATISE BY THOMAS GALLUS","authors":"Declan Lawell","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.76.2.2045807","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.76.2.2045807","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents for the first time a critical edition of a minor treatise named Spectacula contemplationis or The Spectacles of Contemplation by Thomas Gallus. The treatise's aim is to describe the various levels of knowledge that are traversed by the soul in its ascent to God. By the author's own admission, the treatise is inspired by the six types of contemplation listed by Richard of St Victor in his work on contemplation, Benzamin maior. Gallus's treatment however is not just a repetition of the material covered by his fellow Victorine. Though short in length, the treatise reveals some original developments and major points of divergence from Richard's intellectual approach, which reflect the affective Dionysianism of the Abbot of Vercelli. It also calls to mind features of Hugh of St Victor's De tribus diebus and Bonaventure's Itinerarium mentis in Deum, as well as revealing the previously neglected fact that Gallus may have been the author of, or at least wrote a commentary on, a sequence entitled Super mentem exultemus.","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"89 1","pages":"249-285"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2009-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84408434","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-12-31DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.76.2.2045810
J. Marenbon
{"title":"PHILOSOPHY IN THE EARLY LATIN MIDDLE AGES (C. 700 ― C. 1100): A SURVEY OF RECENT WORK","authors":"J. Marenbon","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.76.2.2045810","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.76.2.2045810","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"GE-21 1","pages":"365-393"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2009-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84610409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-06-30DOI: 10.2143/RTPM.76.1.2037161
L. Bianchi
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).
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)。
{"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":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.76.1.2037161","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":0.4,"publicationDate":"2009-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89200705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：