| Title | Averroismi al plurale, II. La ricezione del Commento grande al De anima di Ibn Rushd nelle Quaestiones in tertium de anima di Sigieri di Brabante |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Italian |
| Date | 2019 |
| Journal | Dianoia |
| Volume | 28 |
| Pages | 81–94 |
| Categories | Siger of Brabant, De anima |
| Author(s) | Federico Minzoni |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Siger of Brabant sketches in his Quaestiones in tertium de anima (ca. 1269) a noetic theory defending the unity of the intellect that is usually considered as a latin formulation of Ibn Rušd’s theory of the separateness of the material intellect as put forth in the Long Commentary on the De anima (ca. 1186). A closer look at key texts in both the Quaestiones and the Long Commentary will give us a quite different picture: while Siger works out his theory on the background of a dualistic anthropology that takes the union between the intellective soul (conceived as an hoc aliquid) and the human body to be only operational, Ibn Rušd (who develops his theory starting from strictly aristotelic epistemological premises) repeatedly stresses throughout the Long Commentary that, if man is an agent of thought, the union between the separate intellects and the thinking individual ought to be always hylomorphic. This paper aims at showing that, although Siger has often been identified as an averroist, his psychology is certainly not rushdian. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5014","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5014,"authors_free":[{"id":5750,"entry_id":5014,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":903,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Federico Minzoni","free_first_name":"Federico","free_last_name":"Minzoni","norm_person":{"id":903,"first_name":"","last_name":"","full_name":"","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]="}}],"entry_title":"Averroismi al plurale, II. La ricezione del Commento grande al De anima di Ibn Rushd nelle Quaestiones in tertium de anima di Sigieri di Brabante","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averroismi al plurale, II. La ricezione del Commento grande al De anima di Ibn Rushd nelle Quaestiones in tertium de anima di Sigieri di Brabante"},"abstract":"Siger of Brabant sketches in his Quaestiones in tertium de anima (ca. 1269) a noetic theory defending the unity of the intellect that is usually considered as a latin formulation of Ibn Ru\u0161d\u2019s theory of the separateness of the material intellect as put forth in the Long Commentary on the De anima (ca. 1186). A closer look at key texts in both the Quaestiones and the Long Commentary will give us a quite different picture: while Siger works out his theory on the background of a dualistic anthropology that takes the union between the intellective soul (conceived as an hoc aliquid) and the human body to be only operational, Ibn Ru\u0161d (who develops his theory starting from strictly aristotelic epistemological premises) repeatedly stresses throughout the Long Commentary that, if man is an agent of thought, the union between the separate intellects and the thinking individual ought to be always hylomorphic. This paper aims at showing that, although Siger has often been identified as an averroist, his psychology is certainly not rushdian. ","btype":3,"date":"2019","language":"Italian","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":57,"category_name":"Siger of Brabant","link":"bib?categories[]=Siger of Brabant"},{"id":46,"category_name":"De anima","link":"bib?categories[]=De anima"}],"authors":[{"id":903,"full_name":"","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5014,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Dianoia","volume":"28","issue":"","pages":"81\u201394"}},"sort":[2019]}
| Title | Averroismi al plurale. La ricezione del Tafsîr kitâb al-nafs di Ibn Rushd nel Commento alle Sentenze di Tommaso d’Aquino |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Italian |
| Date | 2017 |
| Journal | Dianoia |
| Volume | 24 |
| Pages | 15-32 |
| Categories | Aristotle, Commentary, De anima, Averroism, Siger of Brabant, Thomas |
| Author(s) | Federico Minzoni |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| A widespread historiographic commonplace, established by Thomas Aquinas himself in his Tractatus de unitate intellectus (1270), takes Siger of Brabant’s Quaestiones in tertium de anima (ca. 1265) to be a latin formulation of Ibn Rušd’s theory of the unity of the material intellect as exposed in the Tafsīr Kitāb al-Nafs (Long Commentary on the De anima, ca. 1186); according to the same view, Aquinas’ philosophy of mind would be the expression of a strongly antiaverroistic – and therefore more orthodox – kind of aristotelianism. Building on a thorough analysis of key texts in Aquinas’ Commentary on the Sentences (1255), I argue in this paper that those who hold Aquinas’ noetic to be anti-averroistic are greatly mistaken: while Siger’s always superficial rushdian inspiration is better understood against the background of a neoplatonic-tinged mind-body dualism clearly at odds with Ibn Rušd’s own strictly peripatetic ontology, Aquinas’ psychology, hylomorfic and not-dualist at its core, is aristotelian mainly inasmuch as it is rushdian. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5154","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5154,"authors_free":[{"id":5935,"entry_id":5154,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1682,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Federico Minzoni","free_first_name":"Federico","free_last_name":"Minzoni","norm_person":{"id":1682,"first_name":"Federico","last_name":"Minzoni","full_name":"Federico Minzoni","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null,"link":"bib?authors[]=Federico Minzoni"}}],"entry_title":"Averroismi al plurale. La ricezione del Tafs\u00eer kit\u00e2b al-nafs di Ibn Rushd nel Commento alle Sentenze di Tommaso d\u2019Aquino","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averroismi al plurale. La ricezione del Tafs\u00eer kit\u00e2b al-nafs di Ibn Rushd nel Commento alle Sentenze di Tommaso d\u2019Aquino"},"abstract":"A widespread historiographic commonplace, established by Thomas Aquinas himself in his Tractatus de unitate intellectus (1270), takes Siger of Brabant\u2019s Quaestiones in tertium de anima (ca. 1265) to be a latin formulation of Ibn Ru\u0161d\u2019s theory of the unity of the material intellect as exposed in the Tafs\u012br Kit\u0101b al-Nafs (Long Commentary on the De anima, ca. 1186); according to the same view, Aquinas\u2019 philosophy of mind would be the expression of a strongly antiaverroistic \u2013 and therefore more orthodox \u2013 kind of aristotelianism. Building on a thorough analysis of key texts in Aquinas\u2019 Commentary on the Sentences (1255), I argue in this paper that those who hold Aquinas\u2019 noetic to be anti-averroistic are greatly mistaken: while Siger\u2019s always superficial rushdian inspiration is better understood against the background of a neoplatonic-tinged mind-body dualism clearly at odds with Ibn Ru\u0161d\u2019s own strictly peripatetic ontology, Aquinas\u2019 psychology, hylomorfic and not-dualist at its core, is aristotelian mainly inasmuch as it is rushdian. ","btype":3,"date":"2017","language":"Italian","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":46,"category_name":"De anima","link":"bib?categories[]=De anima"},{"id":1,"category_name":"Averroism","link":"bib?categories[]=Averroism"},{"id":57,"category_name":"Siger of Brabant","link":"bib?categories[]=Siger of Brabant"},{"id":51,"category_name":"Thomas","link":"bib?categories[]=Thomas"}],"authors":[{"id":1682,"full_name":"Federico Minzoni","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5154,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Dianoia","volume":"24","issue":"","pages":"15-32"}},"sort":[2017]}
| Title | Heresy and Epithet: An Approach to the Problem of Latin Averroism, I |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1954 |
| Journal | The Review of Metaphysics |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 176-199 |
| Categories | Averroism, Latin Averroism, Siger of Brabant, De anima |
| Author(s) | Stuart Mac Clintock |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Online Access | https://www.jstor.org/stable/20123429 |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5651","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5651,"authors_free":[{"id":6556,"entry_id":5651,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Stuart Mac Clintock","free_first_name":"Stuart","free_last_name":"Mac Clintock","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Heresy and Epithet: An Approach to the Problem of Latin Averroism, I","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Heresy and Epithet: An Approach to the Problem of Latin Averroism, I"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"1954","language":"English","online_url":"https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/20123429","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":1,"category_name":"Averroism","link":"bib?categories[]=Averroism"},{"id":7,"category_name":"Latin Averroism","link":"bib?categories[]=Latin Averroism"},{"id":57,"category_name":"Siger of Brabant","link":"bib?categories[]=Siger of Brabant"},{"id":46,"category_name":"De anima","link":"bib?categories[]=De anima"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5651,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Review of Metaphysics","volume":"8","issue":"1","pages":"176-199"}},"sort":[1954]}
| Title | Averroismi al plurale, II. La ricezione del Commento grande al De anima di Ibn Rushd nelle Quaestiones in tertium de anima di Sigieri di Brabante |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Italian |
| Date | 2019 |
| Journal | Dianoia |
| Volume | 28 |
| Pages | 81–94 |
| Categories | Siger of Brabant, De anima |
| Author(s) | Federico Minzoni |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Siger of Brabant sketches in his Quaestiones in tertium de anima (ca. 1269) a noetic theory defending the unity of the intellect that is usually considered as a latin formulation of Ibn Rušd’s theory of the separateness of the material intellect as put forth in the Long Commentary on the De anima (ca. 1186). A closer look at key texts in both the Quaestiones and the Long Commentary will give us a quite different picture: while Siger works out his theory on the background of a dualistic anthropology that takes the union between the intellective soul (conceived as an hoc aliquid) and the human body to be only operational, Ibn Rušd (who develops his theory starting from strictly aristotelic epistemological premises) repeatedly stresses throughout the Long Commentary that, if man is an agent of thought, the union between the separate intellects and the thinking individual ought to be always hylomorphic. This paper aims at showing that, although Siger has often been identified as an averroist, his psychology is certainly not rushdian. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5014","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5014,"authors_free":[{"id":5750,"entry_id":5014,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":903,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Federico Minzoni","free_first_name":"Federico","free_last_name":"Minzoni","norm_person":{"id":903,"first_name":"","last_name":"","full_name":"","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]="}}],"entry_title":"Averroismi al plurale, II. La ricezione del Commento grande al De anima di Ibn Rushd nelle Quaestiones in tertium de anima di Sigieri di Brabante","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averroismi al plurale, II. La ricezione del Commento grande al De anima di Ibn Rushd nelle Quaestiones in tertium de anima di Sigieri di Brabante"},"abstract":"Siger of Brabant sketches in his Quaestiones in tertium de anima (ca. 1269) a noetic theory defending the unity of the intellect that is usually considered as a latin formulation of Ibn Ru\u0161d\u2019s theory of the separateness of the material intellect as put forth in the Long Commentary on the De anima (ca. 1186). A closer look at key texts in both the Quaestiones and the Long Commentary will give us a quite different picture: while Siger works out his theory on the background of a dualistic anthropology that takes the union between the intellective soul (conceived as an hoc aliquid) and the human body to be only operational, Ibn Ru\u0161d (who develops his theory starting from strictly aristotelic epistemological premises) repeatedly stresses throughout the Long Commentary that, if man is an agent of thought, the union between the separate intellects and the thinking individual ought to be always hylomorphic. This paper aims at showing that, although Siger has often been identified as an averroist, his psychology is certainly not rushdian. ","btype":3,"date":"2019","language":"Italian","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":57,"category_name":"Siger of Brabant","link":"bib?categories[]=Siger of Brabant"},{"id":46,"category_name":"De anima","link":"bib?categories[]=De anima"}],"authors":[{"id":903,"full_name":"","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5014,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Dianoia","volume":"28","issue":"","pages":"81\u201394"}},"sort":["Averroismi al plurale, II. La ricezione del Commento grande al De anima di Ibn Rushd nelle Quaestiones in tertium de anima di Sigieri di Brabante"]}
| Title | Averroismi al plurale. La ricezione del Tafsîr kitâb al-nafs di Ibn Rushd nel Commento alle Sentenze di Tommaso d’Aquino |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Italian |
| Date | 2017 |
| Journal | Dianoia |
| Volume | 24 |
| Pages | 15-32 |
| Categories | Aristotle, Commentary, De anima, Averroism, Siger of Brabant, Thomas |
| Author(s) | Federico Minzoni |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| A widespread historiographic commonplace, established by Thomas Aquinas himself in his Tractatus de unitate intellectus (1270), takes Siger of Brabant’s Quaestiones in tertium de anima (ca. 1265) to be a latin formulation of Ibn Rušd’s theory of the unity of the material intellect as exposed in the Tafsīr Kitāb al-Nafs (Long Commentary on the De anima, ca. 1186); according to the same view, Aquinas’ philosophy of mind would be the expression of a strongly antiaverroistic – and therefore more orthodox – kind of aristotelianism. Building on a thorough analysis of key texts in Aquinas’ Commentary on the Sentences (1255), I argue in this paper that those who hold Aquinas’ noetic to be anti-averroistic are greatly mistaken: while Siger’s always superficial rushdian inspiration is better understood against the background of a neoplatonic-tinged mind-body dualism clearly at odds with Ibn Rušd’s own strictly peripatetic ontology, Aquinas’ psychology, hylomorfic and not-dualist at its core, is aristotelian mainly inasmuch as it is rushdian. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5154","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5154,"authors_free":[{"id":5935,"entry_id":5154,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1682,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Federico Minzoni","free_first_name":"Federico","free_last_name":"Minzoni","norm_person":{"id":1682,"first_name":"Federico","last_name":"Minzoni","full_name":"Federico Minzoni","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null,"link":"bib?authors[]=Federico Minzoni"}}],"entry_title":"Averroismi al plurale. La ricezione del Tafs\u00eer kit\u00e2b al-nafs di Ibn Rushd nel Commento alle Sentenze di Tommaso d\u2019Aquino","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averroismi al plurale. La ricezione del Tafs\u00eer kit\u00e2b al-nafs di Ibn Rushd nel Commento alle Sentenze di Tommaso d\u2019Aquino"},"abstract":"A widespread historiographic commonplace, established by Thomas Aquinas himself in his Tractatus de unitate intellectus (1270), takes Siger of Brabant\u2019s Quaestiones in tertium de anima (ca. 1265) to be a latin formulation of Ibn Ru\u0161d\u2019s theory of the unity of the material intellect as exposed in the Tafs\u012br Kit\u0101b al-Nafs (Long Commentary on the De anima, ca. 1186); according to the same view, Aquinas\u2019 philosophy of mind would be the expression of a strongly antiaverroistic \u2013 and therefore more orthodox \u2013 kind of aristotelianism. Building on a thorough analysis of key texts in Aquinas\u2019 Commentary on the Sentences (1255), I argue in this paper that those who hold Aquinas\u2019 noetic to be anti-averroistic are greatly mistaken: while Siger\u2019s always superficial rushdian inspiration is better understood against the background of a neoplatonic-tinged mind-body dualism clearly at odds with Ibn Ru\u0161d\u2019s own strictly peripatetic ontology, Aquinas\u2019 psychology, hylomorfic and not-dualist at its core, is aristotelian mainly inasmuch as it is rushdian. ","btype":3,"date":"2017","language":"Italian","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":46,"category_name":"De anima","link":"bib?categories[]=De anima"},{"id":1,"category_name":"Averroism","link":"bib?categories[]=Averroism"},{"id":57,"category_name":"Siger of Brabant","link":"bib?categories[]=Siger of Brabant"},{"id":51,"category_name":"Thomas","link":"bib?categories[]=Thomas"}],"authors":[{"id":1682,"full_name":"Federico Minzoni","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5154,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Dianoia","volume":"24","issue":"","pages":"15-32"}},"sort":["Averroismi al plurale. La ricezione del Tafs\u00eer kit\u00e2b al-nafs di Ibn Rushd nel Commento alle Sentenze di Tommaso d\u2019Aquino"]}
| Title | Heresy and Epithet: An Approach to the Problem of Latin Averroism, I |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1954 |
| Journal | The Review of Metaphysics |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 176-199 |
| Categories | Averroism, Latin Averroism, Siger of Brabant, De anima |
| Author(s) | Stuart Mac Clintock |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Online Access | https://www.jstor.org/stable/20123429 |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5651","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5651,"authors_free":[{"id":6556,"entry_id":5651,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Stuart Mac Clintock","free_first_name":"Stuart","free_last_name":"Mac Clintock","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Heresy and Epithet: An Approach to the Problem of Latin Averroism, I","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Heresy and Epithet: An Approach to the Problem of Latin Averroism, I"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"1954","language":"English","online_url":"https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/20123429","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":1,"category_name":"Averroism","link":"bib?categories[]=Averroism"},{"id":7,"category_name":"Latin Averroism","link":"bib?categories[]=Latin Averroism"},{"id":57,"category_name":"Siger of Brabant","link":"bib?categories[]=Siger of Brabant"},{"id":46,"category_name":"De anima","link":"bib?categories[]=De anima"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5651,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Review of Metaphysics","volume":"8","issue":"1","pages":"176-199"}},"sort":["Heresy and Epithet: An Approach to the Problem of Latin Averroism, I"]}