论霍布斯对意外事件的区分

Q4 Arts and Humanities Montesquieu.it Pub Date : 2012-12-01 DOI:10.6092/ISSN.2421-4124/5158
A. Lupoli
{"title":"论霍布斯对意外事件的区分","authors":"A. Lupoli","doi":"10.6092/ISSN.2421-4124/5158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An interpolation introduced by K. Schuhmann in his critical edition of De corpore (chap. VI, § 13) diametrically overturns the meaning of Hobbes’s doctrine of distinction of accidents in comparison with all previous editions. The article focuses on the complexity of this crucial juncture in De corpore argument on which depends the interpretation of Hobbes’s whole conception of science. It discusses the reasons pro and contra Schuhmann’s interpolation and concludes against it, because it is not compatible with the rationale underlying the complex architecture of De corpore, which involves a symmetry between the ‘logical’ distinction of accidents and the ‘metaphysical’ distinction of phantasms.","PeriodicalId":36096,"journal":{"name":"Montesquieu.it","volume":"86 1","pages":"119-119"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Hobbes’s distinction of accidents\",\"authors\":\"A. Lupoli\",\"doi\":\"10.6092/ISSN.2421-4124/5158\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"An interpolation introduced by K. Schuhmann in his critical edition of De corpore (chap. VI, § 13) diametrically overturns the meaning of Hobbes’s doctrine of distinction of accidents in comparison with all previous editions. The article focuses on the complexity of this crucial juncture in De corpore argument on which depends the interpretation of Hobbes’s whole conception of science. It discusses the reasons pro and contra Schuhmann’s interpolation and concludes against it, because it is not compatible with the rationale underlying the complex architecture of De corpore, which involves a symmetry between the ‘logical’ distinction of accidents and the ‘metaphysical’ distinction of phantasms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36096,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Montesquieu.it\",\"volume\":\"86 1\",\"pages\":\"119-119\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Montesquieu.it\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6092/ISSN.2421-4124/5158\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Montesquieu.it","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6092/ISSN.2421-4124/5158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

舒曼在他的批判版《论主体》(第六章,第13节)中所作的补充,与以前所有的版本相比,完全推翻了霍布斯关于意外区别学说的意义。本文聚焦于“论本体”论证中这一关键节点的复杂性,而霍布斯的整个科学概念的解释就依赖于这一关键节点。它讨论了支持和反对舒曼插值的原因,并得出了反对它的结论,因为它与De corpore复杂架构的基本原理不相容,后者涉及意外的“逻辑”区分和幻影的“形而上学”区分之间的对称。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
On Hobbes’s distinction of accidents
An interpolation introduced by K. Schuhmann in his critical edition of De corpore (chap. VI, § 13) diametrically overturns the meaning of Hobbes’s doctrine of distinction of accidents in comparison with all previous editions. The article focuses on the complexity of this crucial juncture in De corpore argument on which depends the interpretation of Hobbes’s whole conception of science. It discusses the reasons pro and contra Schuhmann’s interpolation and concludes against it, because it is not compatible with the rationale underlying the complex architecture of De corpore, which involves a symmetry between the ‘logical’ distinction of accidents and the ‘metaphysical’ distinction of phantasms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Montesquieu.it
Montesquieu.it Arts and Humanities-History
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Contesti smithiani: transizione, progresso e conflitto Considerazioni su Voltaire studioso di Pietro il Grande e della Russia «Orgogliose come demoni»: le monache ribelli di Port-Royal L’esperienza e la certezza. Postille a Pascal, Opere complete. Prima tra-duzione italiana , testi francesi e latini a fronte, a cura di M.V. Romeo, Firenze-Milano, Giunti-Bompiani, 2020, XXXIX-3133 pp. Lavoro e libertà nelle speculazioni di Gianvincenzo Gravina, di Giambattista Vico e di Francesco Longano
×
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