| Title | Pomponazzi Contra Averroes on the Intellect |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Journal | British Journal for the History of Philosophy |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 45–66 |
| Categories | Renaissance, De anima, Aristotle, Alexander of Aphrodisias, Themistius, Thomas |
| Author(s) | John Sellars |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| This paper examines Pomponazzi's arguments against Averroes in his De Immortalitate Animae, focusing on the question whether thought is possible without a body. The first part of the paper will sketch the history of the problem, namely the interpretation of Aristotle's remarks about the intellect in De Anima 3.4-5, touching on Alexander, Themistius, and Averroes. The second part will focus on Pomponazzi's response to Averroes, including his use of arguments by Aquinas. It will conclude by suggesting that Pomponazzi's discussion stands as the first properly modern account of Aristotle's psychology. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5255","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5255,"authors_free":[{"id":6064,"entry_id":5255,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"John Sellars","free_first_name":"John","free_last_name":"Sellars","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Pomponazzi Contra Averroes on the Intellect","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Pomponazzi Contra Averroes on the Intellect"},"abstract":"This paper examines Pomponazzi's arguments against Averroes in his De Immortalitate Animae, focusing on the question whether thought is possible without a body. The first part of the paper will sketch the history of the problem, namely the interpretation of Aristotle's remarks about the intellect in De Anima 3.4-5, touching on Alexander, Themistius, and Averroes. The second part will focus on Pomponazzi's response to Averroes, including his use of arguments by Aquinas. It will conclude by suggesting that Pomponazzi's discussion stands as the first properly modern account of Aristotle's psychology.","btype":3,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/09608788.2015.1063979","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":5,"category_name":"Renaissance","link":"bib?categories[]=Renaissance"},{"id":46,"category_name":"De anima","link":"bib?categories[]=De anima"},{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"},{"id":16,"category_name":"Themistius","link":"bib?categories[]=Themistius"},{"id":51,"category_name":"Thomas","link":"bib?categories[]=Thomas"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5255,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"British Journal for the History of Philosophy","volume":"24","issue":"1","pages":"45\u201366"}},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Ibn Rušd on the Structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2010 |
| Journal | Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale |
| Volume | 21 |
| Pages | 375–410 |
| Categories | Metaphysics, Aristotle, Alexander of Aphrodisias |
| Author(s) | Rüdiger Arnzen |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics was a matter of dispute among ancient and Medieval Greek, Arabic, and Latin-writing commentators. The present article investigates the question in which way the Arab philosopher Averroes dealt with this problem in his so-called Epitome and his literal commentary on the Metaphysics. It tries to show that in the Epitome Averroes restructured the contents of the Metaphysics according to his own conception of this discipline, and that this conception was partly indebted to his own main sources, al-Fārābī and Ibn Sīnā, partly independent from these. Furthemore, the article examines whether and, if so, in which whay Averroes changed his mind about metaphysics as such and/or the structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics in his late literal commentary. It is argued that Averroes discarded there some of his earlier Avicennian positions in favour of a certain rapprochement to positions held by Alexander of Aphrodisias, but never gave up in general his overall conception of the Metaphysics as displayed in the Epitome. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1538","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1538,"authors_free":[{"id":1765,"entry_id":1538,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":535,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"R\u00fcdiger Arnzen","free_first_name":"R\u00fcdiger","free_last_name":"Arnzen","norm_person":{"id":535,"first_name":"R\u00fcdiger","last_name":"Arnzen","full_name":"R\u00fcdiger Arnzen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115210423","viaf_url":"NULL","db_url":"NULL","from_claudius":0,"link":"bib?authors[]=R\u00fcdiger Arnzen"}}],"entry_title":"Ibn Ru\u0161d on the Structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Ibn Ru\u0161d on the Structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics"},"abstract":"The structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics was a matter of dispute among ancient and Medieval Greek, Arabic, and Latin-writing commentators. The present article investigates the question in which way the Arab philosopher Averroes dealt with this problem in his so-called Epitome and his literal commentary on the Metaphysics. It tries to show that in the Epitome Averroes restructured the contents of the Metaphysics according to his own conception of this discipline, and that this conception was partly indebted to his own main sources, al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b and Ibn S\u012bn\u0101, partly independent from these. Furthemore, the article examines whether and, if so, in which whay Averroes changed his mind about metaphysics as such and\/or the structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics in his late literal commentary. It is argued that Averroes discarded there some of his earlier Avicennian positions in favour of a certain rapprochement to positions held by Alexander of Aphrodisias, but never gave up in general his overall conception of the Metaphysics as displayed in the Epitome.","btype":3,"date":"2010","language":"English","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"},{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"}],"authors":[{"id":535,"full_name":"R\u00fcdiger Arnzen","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1538,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale","volume":"21","issue":null,"pages":"375\u2013410"}},"sort":[2010]}
| Title | Ibn Rušd on the Structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2010 |
| Journal | Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale |
| Volume | 21 |
| Pages | 375–410 |
| Categories | Metaphysics, Aristotle, Alexander of Aphrodisias |
| Author(s) | Rüdiger Arnzen |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics was a matter of dispute among ancient and Medieval Greek, Arabic, and Latin-writing commentators. The present article investigates the question in which way the Arab philosopher Averroes dealt with this problem in his so-called Epitome and his literal commentary on the Metaphysics. It tries to show that in the Epitome Averroes restructured the contents of the Metaphysics according to his own conception of this discipline, and that this conception was partly indebted to his own main sources, al-Fārābī and Ibn Sīnā, partly independent from these. Furthemore, the article examines whether and, if so, in which whay Averroes changed his mind about metaphysics as such and/or the structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics in his late literal commentary. It is argued that Averroes discarded there some of his earlier Avicennian positions in favour of a certain rapprochement to positions held by Alexander of Aphrodisias, but never gave up in general his overall conception of the Metaphysics as displayed in the Epitome. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1538","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1538,"authors_free":[{"id":1765,"entry_id":1538,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":535,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"R\u00fcdiger Arnzen","free_first_name":"R\u00fcdiger","free_last_name":"Arnzen","norm_person":{"id":535,"first_name":"R\u00fcdiger","last_name":"Arnzen","full_name":"R\u00fcdiger Arnzen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115210423","viaf_url":"NULL","db_url":"NULL","from_claudius":0,"link":"bib?authors[]=R\u00fcdiger Arnzen"}}],"entry_title":"Ibn Ru\u0161d on the Structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Ibn Ru\u0161d on the Structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics"},"abstract":"The structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics was a matter of dispute among ancient and Medieval Greek, Arabic, and Latin-writing commentators. The present article investigates the question in which way the Arab philosopher Averroes dealt with this problem in his so-called Epitome and his literal commentary on the Metaphysics. It tries to show that in the Epitome Averroes restructured the contents of the Metaphysics according to his own conception of this discipline, and that this conception was partly indebted to his own main sources, al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b and Ibn S\u012bn\u0101, partly independent from these. Furthemore, the article examines whether and, if so, in which whay Averroes changed his mind about metaphysics as such and\/or the structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics in his late literal commentary. It is argued that Averroes discarded there some of his earlier Avicennian positions in favour of a certain rapprochement to positions held by Alexander of Aphrodisias, but never gave up in general his overall conception of the Metaphysics as displayed in the Epitome.","btype":3,"date":"2010","language":"English","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"},{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"}],"authors":[{"id":535,"full_name":"R\u00fcdiger Arnzen","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1538,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale","volume":"21","issue":null,"pages":"375\u2013410"}},"sort":["Ibn Ru\u0161d on the Structure of Aristotle's Metaphysics"]}
| Title | Pomponazzi Contra Averroes on the Intellect |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Journal | British Journal for the History of Philosophy |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 45–66 |
| Categories | Renaissance, De anima, Aristotle, Alexander of Aphrodisias, Themistius, Thomas |
| Author(s) | John Sellars |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| This paper examines Pomponazzi's arguments against Averroes in his De Immortalitate Animae, focusing on the question whether thought is possible without a body. The first part of the paper will sketch the history of the problem, namely the interpretation of Aristotle's remarks about the intellect in De Anima 3.4-5, touching on Alexander, Themistius, and Averroes. The second part will focus on Pomponazzi's response to Averroes, including his use of arguments by Aquinas. It will conclude by suggesting that Pomponazzi's discussion stands as the first properly modern account of Aristotle's psychology. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5255","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5255,"authors_free":[{"id":6064,"entry_id":5255,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"John Sellars","free_first_name":"John","free_last_name":"Sellars","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Pomponazzi Contra Averroes on the Intellect","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Pomponazzi Contra Averroes on the Intellect"},"abstract":"This paper examines Pomponazzi's arguments against Averroes in his De Immortalitate Animae, focusing on the question whether thought is possible without a body. The first part of the paper will sketch the history of the problem, namely the interpretation of Aristotle's remarks about the intellect in De Anima 3.4-5, touching on Alexander, Themistius, and Averroes. The second part will focus on Pomponazzi's response to Averroes, including his use of arguments by Aquinas. It will conclude by suggesting that Pomponazzi's discussion stands as the first properly modern account of Aristotle's psychology.","btype":3,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/09608788.2015.1063979","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":5,"category_name":"Renaissance","link":"bib?categories[]=Renaissance"},{"id":46,"category_name":"De anima","link":"bib?categories[]=De anima"},{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"},{"id":16,"category_name":"Themistius","link":"bib?categories[]=Themistius"},{"id":51,"category_name":"Thomas","link":"bib?categories[]=Thomas"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5255,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"British Journal for the History of Philosophy","volume":"24","issue":"1","pages":"45\u201366"}},"sort":["Pomponazzi Contra Averroes on the Intellect"]}