| Title | Does Each of Us Think Our Own Universal? An Averroean Challenge for (Aquinas and) Hervaeus Natalis |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2022 |
| Journal | History of Philosophy Quarterly |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 339-354 |
| Categories | Metaphysics, Psychology |
| Author(s) | Hamid Taieb |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| This paper aims to address a problem faced by any philosopher who treats universals as intentional objects: in defending this thesis, aren't they committed to the view that each of us thinks an individuated universal, since each of us, when thinking of a universal, must have our own intentional object? This problem, which is mentioned by Brentano at the turn of the twentieth century, originated in the Middle Ages in debates initiated by Averroes about the nature of the intellect. It shows up in the later Aquinas, due to his theory of the verbum, which might be interpreted as a sort of intentional object, but it is solved without too much difficulty. It is later found in Hervaeus Natalis, who does accept intentional objects; in contrast to Aquinas, it is not clear that Hervaeus has a good solution to the problem. After first presenting the problem, this paper then turns to its medieval origins by analyzing its occurrence in Aquinas's criticism of Averroes. It then explains why Hervaeus has more difficulties than Aquinas in solving the problem. It concludes with a systematic reflection on the various possible solutions to the problem. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5805","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5805,"authors_free":[{"id":6726,"entry_id":5805,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":1902,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hamid Taieb","free_first_name":"Hamid ","free_last_name":"Taieb","norm_person":{"id":1902,"first_name":"Hamid ","last_name":"Taieb","full_name":"Hamid Taieb","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"https:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1077921705","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null,"link":"bib?authors[]=Hamid Taieb"}}],"entry_title":"Does Each of Us Think Our Own Universal? An Averroean Challenge for (Aquinas and) Hervaeus Natalis","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Does Each of Us Think Our Own Universal? An Averroean Challenge for (Aquinas and) Hervaeus Natalis"},"abstract":"This paper aims to address a problem faced by any philosopher who treats universals as intentional objects: in defending this thesis, aren't they committed to the view that each of us thinks an individuated universal, since each of us, when thinking of a universal, must have our own intentional object? This problem, which is mentioned by Brentano at the turn of the twentieth century, originated in the Middle Ages in debates initiated by Averroes about the nature of the intellect. It shows up in the later Aquinas, due to his theory of the verbum, which might be interpreted as a sort of intentional object, but it is solved without too much difficulty. It is later found in Hervaeus Natalis, who does accept intentional objects; in contrast to Aquinas, it is not clear that Hervaeus has a good solution to the problem. After first presenting the problem, this paper then turns to its medieval origins by analyzing its occurrence in Aquinas's criticism of Averroes. It then explains why Hervaeus has more difficulties than Aquinas in solving the problem. It concludes with a systematic reflection on the various possible solutions to the problem.","btype":3,"date":"2022","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"10.5406\/21521026.39.4.03","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"},{"id":12,"category_name":"Psychology","link":"bib?categories[]=Psychology"}],"authors":[{"id":1902,"full_name":"Hamid Taieb","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5805,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"History of Philosophy Quarterly","volume":"39","issue":"4","pages":"339-354"}},"sort":[2022]}
| Title | Does Each of Us Think Our Own Universal? An Averroean Challenge for (Aquinas and) Hervaeus Natalis |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2022 |
| Journal | History of Philosophy Quarterly |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 339-354 |
| Categories | Metaphysics, Psychology |
| Author(s) | Hamid Taieb |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| This paper aims to address a problem faced by any philosopher who treats universals as intentional objects: in defending this thesis, aren't they committed to the view that each of us thinks an individuated universal, since each of us, when thinking of a universal, must have our own intentional object? This problem, which is mentioned by Brentano at the turn of the twentieth century, originated in the Middle Ages in debates initiated by Averroes about the nature of the intellect. It shows up in the later Aquinas, due to his theory of the verbum, which might be interpreted as a sort of intentional object, but it is solved without too much difficulty. It is later found in Hervaeus Natalis, who does accept intentional objects; in contrast to Aquinas, it is not clear that Hervaeus has a good solution to the problem. After first presenting the problem, this paper then turns to its medieval origins by analyzing its occurrence in Aquinas's criticism of Averroes. It then explains why Hervaeus has more difficulties than Aquinas in solving the problem. It concludes with a systematic reflection on the various possible solutions to the problem. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5805","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5805,"authors_free":[{"id":6726,"entry_id":5805,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":1902,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hamid Taieb","free_first_name":"Hamid ","free_last_name":"Taieb","norm_person":{"id":1902,"first_name":"Hamid ","last_name":"Taieb","full_name":"Hamid Taieb","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"https:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1077921705","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null,"link":"bib?authors[]=Hamid Taieb"}}],"entry_title":"Does Each of Us Think Our Own Universal? An Averroean Challenge for (Aquinas and) Hervaeus Natalis","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Does Each of Us Think Our Own Universal? An Averroean Challenge for (Aquinas and) Hervaeus Natalis"},"abstract":"This paper aims to address a problem faced by any philosopher who treats universals as intentional objects: in defending this thesis, aren't they committed to the view that each of us thinks an individuated universal, since each of us, when thinking of a universal, must have our own intentional object? This problem, which is mentioned by Brentano at the turn of the twentieth century, originated in the Middle Ages in debates initiated by Averroes about the nature of the intellect. It shows up in the later Aquinas, due to his theory of the verbum, which might be interpreted as a sort of intentional object, but it is solved without too much difficulty. It is later found in Hervaeus Natalis, who does accept intentional objects; in contrast to Aquinas, it is not clear that Hervaeus has a good solution to the problem. After first presenting the problem, this paper then turns to its medieval origins by analyzing its occurrence in Aquinas's criticism of Averroes. It then explains why Hervaeus has more difficulties than Aquinas in solving the problem. It concludes with a systematic reflection on the various possible solutions to the problem.","btype":3,"date":"2022","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"10.5406\/21521026.39.4.03","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"},{"id":12,"category_name":"Psychology","link":"bib?categories[]=Psychology"}],"authors":[{"id":1902,"full_name":"Hamid Taieb","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5805,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"History of Philosophy Quarterly","volume":"39","issue":"4","pages":"339-354"}},"sort":["Does Each of Us Think Our Own Universal? An Averroean Challenge for (Aquinas and) Hervaeus Natalis"]}