论卫斯理的形而上学问题(文本分析)

D. Liscia
{"title":"论卫斯理的形而上学问题(文本分析)","authors":"D. Liscia","doi":"10.21747/21836892/fil35a3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It can hardly be questioned that the history of Western philosophy is to a good extent also a history of texts. For medieval philosophy it is likewise valid, from the thirteenth century onward, that these texts are mostly connected to university teaching and, at the same time, for good or not, to the aristotelian philosophy. This fact is easily verifiable for the major commentaries on the Aristoteles latinus and for almost each european university as well. The present contribution deals with a part of the later commentary tradition on the Metaphysics at the late medieval German universities. It focusses on a text – a quaestiones commentary on the Metaphysics – the transmission of which is extraordinarily complex. It examines two late medieval authors: John of Wesel (Johannes Rucherat de Wesalia), less known for his aristotelian commentaries than for his confrontation with the Roman church, and nicholas of amsterdam, whose work has received considerable attention in recent scholarship. Both philosophers were active at several German universities during the first half of the fifteenth century and commented on many aristotelian texts, including the Metaphysics. This paper emerged from an analysis of a manuscript (Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, F VIII 7) conveying a quaestiones commentary attributed to John of Wesel. after some basic information, a more detailed comparison shows, however, that this text runs essentially identical with one of nicholas’ versions of his own commentary. Finally, a proposal of interpreting this fact considering the university standards of the time is included.","PeriodicalId":30039,"journal":{"name":"Historia Revista da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Questions on the Metaphysics attributed to Johannes Rucherat de Wesalia (A Textual Analysis)\",\"authors\":\"D. Liscia\",\"doi\":\"10.21747/21836892/fil35a3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It can hardly be questioned that the history of Western philosophy is to a good extent also a history of texts. For medieval philosophy it is likewise valid, from the thirteenth century onward, that these texts are mostly connected to university teaching and, at the same time, for good or not, to the aristotelian philosophy. This fact is easily verifiable for the major commentaries on the Aristoteles latinus and for almost each european university as well. The present contribution deals with a part of the later commentary tradition on the Metaphysics at the late medieval German universities. It focusses on a text – a quaestiones commentary on the Metaphysics – the transmission of which is extraordinarily complex. It examines two late medieval authors: John of Wesel (Johannes Rucherat de Wesalia), less known for his aristotelian commentaries than for his confrontation with the Roman church, and nicholas of amsterdam, whose work has received considerable attention in recent scholarship. Both philosophers were active at several German universities during the first half of the fifteenth century and commented on many aristotelian texts, including the Metaphysics. This paper emerged from an analysis of a manuscript (Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, F VIII 7) conveying a quaestiones commentary attributed to John of Wesel. after some basic information, a more detailed comparison shows, however, that this text runs essentially identical with one of nicholas’ versions of his own commentary. Finally, a proposal of interpreting this fact considering the university standards of the time is included.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30039,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Historia Revista da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Historia Revista da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21747/21836892/fil35a3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historia Revista da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21747/21836892/fil35a3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

毫无疑问,西方哲学史在很大程度上也是一部文本史。对于中世纪哲学来说,从13世纪开始,这些文本大多与大学教学有关,同时,无论好坏,与亚里士多德哲学有关。这一事实很容易在对亚里士多德的主要评论以及几乎每一所欧洲大学中得到证实。目前的贡献涉及中世纪晚期德国大学对形而上学的后期评论传统的一部分。它关注的是一篇关于《形而上学》的问题评论,它的传播是非常复杂的。它考察了两位中世纪晚期的作家:韦塞尔的约翰(约翰内斯·鲁切拉·德·韦塞利亚),他的亚里士多德式评论比他与罗马教会的对抗更出名,阿姆斯特丹的尼古拉斯,他的作品在最近的学术界受到了相当大的关注。在15世纪上半叶,两位哲学家都活跃于德国的几所大学,并评论了许多亚里士多德的著作,包括《形而上学》。这篇论文是从一份手稿(巴塞尔,Universitätsbibliothek, F VIII 7)的分析中出现的,传达了一个问题的评论,归因于韦塞尔的约翰。然而,在一些基本信息之后,更详细的比较表明,这篇文章与尼古拉斯自己的评论的一个版本基本相同。最后,结合当时的大学标准对这一事实进行了解释。
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
The Questions on the Metaphysics attributed to Johannes Rucherat de Wesalia (A Textual Analysis)
It can hardly be questioned that the history of Western philosophy is to a good extent also a history of texts. For medieval philosophy it is likewise valid, from the thirteenth century onward, that these texts are mostly connected to university teaching and, at the same time, for good or not, to the aristotelian philosophy. This fact is easily verifiable for the major commentaries on the Aristoteles latinus and for almost each european university as well. The present contribution deals with a part of the later commentary tradition on the Metaphysics at the late medieval German universities. It focusses on a text – a quaestiones commentary on the Metaphysics – the transmission of which is extraordinarily complex. It examines two late medieval authors: John of Wesel (Johannes Rucherat de Wesalia), less known for his aristotelian commentaries than for his confrontation with the Roman church, and nicholas of amsterdam, whose work has received considerable attention in recent scholarship. Both philosophers were active at several German universities during the first half of the fifteenth century and commented on many aristotelian texts, including the Metaphysics. This paper emerged from an analysis of a manuscript (Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, F VIII 7) conveying a quaestiones commentary attributed to John of Wesel. after some basic information, a more detailed comparison shows, however, that this text runs essentially identical with one of nicholas’ versions of his own commentary. Finally, a proposal of interpreting this fact considering the university standards of the time is included.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Os Dolia da Antiguidade Tardia do Castro de Guifões (Matosinhos) A Carta de Património Arqueológico do PDM do Porto Possibilidades e Limites de uma Cartografia da Memória e Mutabilidade da Cidade. Parte I – Centro Histórico E Áreas Adjacentes ELABORAÇÃO DE IOGURTES GREGO COM CUBIU (SOLANUM SESSILIFLORUM DUNAL) DESENVOLVIMENTO E COMPARAÇÃO FÍSICO-QUÍMICA DE IOGURTE PROBIÓTICO BATIDO COM ADIÇÃO DE Lactobacillus acidophilus e ADIÇÃO DE Saccharomyces boulardii ENCAPSULADOS E SABORIZADO COM CUBIU Solanum sessiliflorum BISCOITO TIPO COOKIES COM ADIÇÃO DE CUBIU CRISTALIZADO
×
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