New Wine in Old Vessels: Alexander of Aphrodisias as a Source for Averroes’ Metaphysics, 2021
By: Matteo Di Giovanni
Title New Wine in Old Vessels: Alexander of Aphrodisias as a Source for Averroes’ Metaphysics
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2021
Published in Alexander of Aphrodisias in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance
Pages 59–76
Categories Alexander of Aphrodisias, Commentary, Aristotle, Metaphysics
Author(s) Matteo Di Giovanni
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
Besides his best-known merits as a philosopher, Averroes stands out in the history of the classical tradition as a unique testimony to Alexander’s lost commentary on Metaphysics Lambda and, through it, his interpretation of the argument running through the whole text of the Metaphysics. The gist of this interpretation is laid out in the elaborate prologue to the Lambda commentary that goes back to Alexander and is preserved by Averroes. Building on this textual evidence, the study investigates Averroes’ philosophical appropriation of the Alexander material that is interwoven into the fabric of the former’s exegesis, from the earlier epitome to the later long commentary on the Metaphysics. A number of doctrines turn out to be ultimately inspired by Alexander, including Averroes’ view of the tripartite structure of metaphysics, his notion of book Gamma as an epistemology (“specific logic”) for metaphysics, the function of Delta, the downgrading of both mental and accidental being in Epsilon, and Aristotle’s argument in Zeta. Averroes’ debt to his source is brought to the fore without prejudicing the further question, awaiting future research, of whether Averroes’ acquaintance with Alexander’s line of interpretation was always unmediated or any figures in the philosophical tradition played some role in its transmission.

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5030","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":5030,"authors_free":[{"id":5774,"entry_id":5030,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":734,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Matteo Di Giovanni","free_first_name":"Matteo","free_last_name":"Di Giovanni","norm_person":{"id":734,"first_name":"Matteo","last_name":"Di Giovanni","full_name":"Matteo di Giovanni","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1130687570","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/9497149368819485980007","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Matteo di Giovanni"}}],"entry_title":"New Wine in Old Vessels: Alexander of Aphrodisias as a Source for Averroes\u2019 Metaphysics","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"New Wine in Old Vessels: Alexander of Aphrodisias as a Source for Averroes\u2019 Metaphysics"},"abstract":"Besides his best-known merits as a philosopher, Averroes stands out in the history of the classical tradition as a unique testimony to Alexander\u2019s lost commentary on Metaphysics Lambda and, through it, his interpretation of the argument running through the whole text of the Metaphysics. The gist of this interpretation is laid out in the elaborate prologue to the Lambda commentary that goes back to Alexander and is preserved by Averroes. Building on this textual evidence, the study investigates Averroes\u2019 philosophical appropriation of the Alexander material that is interwoven into the fabric of the former\u2019s exegesis, from the earlier epitome to the later long commentary on the Metaphysics. A number of doctrines turn out to be ultimately inspired by Alexander, including Averroes\u2019 view of the tripartite structure of metaphysics, his notion of book Gamma as an epistemology (\u201cspecific logic\u201d) for metaphysics, the function of Delta, the downgrading of both mental and accidental being in Epsilon, and Aristotle\u2019s argument in Zeta. Averroes\u2019 debt to his source is brought to the fore without prejudicing the further question, awaiting future research, of whether Averroes\u2019 acquaintance with Alexander\u2019s line of interpretation was always unmediated or any figures in the philosophical tradition played some role in its transmission.","btype":2,"date":"2021","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1484\/M.SA-EB.5.120536","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"}],"authors":[{"id":734,"full_name":"Matteo di Giovanni","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":{"id":5030,"section_of":5029,"pages":"59\u201376","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":5029,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2021","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"The greatest ancient interpreter of Aristotle, Alexander of Aphrodisias (fl. 200 AD) exerted a profound and enduring influence upon philosophy from Boethius until the modern era. Alexander\u2019s interpretations laid the foundation for multiple philosophical views which were promoted as quintessentially Aristotelian by both Islamic and Latin thinkers throughout the Middle Ages. In the Renaissance, the University of Padua, a leading center of philosophical education and thought, established a scholarly tradition named \u201cAlexandrinism\u201d after him. ","republication_of":0,"online_url":"","online_resources":null,"translation_of":"0","new_edition_of":"0","is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"ti_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1484\/M.SA-EB.5.119428","book":{"id":5029,"pubplace":"Turnhout","publisher":"Brepols","series":"Studia artistarum","volume":"45","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2021]}

Grek Şârihlerden İbn Rüşd'e Değin Aristoteles'in Theta (Θ) Kitabı'nın Hâricî Tarihi, 2019
By: Abdürrezzak Sevindik
Title Grek Şârihlerden İbn Rüşd'e Değin Aristoteles'in Theta (Θ) Kitabı'nın Hâricî Tarihi
Type Article
Language Turkish
Date 2019
Journal Sirnak University Journal of Divinity Faculty / Sirnak Üniversitesi Ilahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi
Volume 10
Issue 23
Pages 469-486
Categories Aristotle, Commentary, Metaphysics, Alexander of Aphrodisias
Author(s) Abdürrezzak Sevindik
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
The purpose of the article is to discuss the external history of the Book of Theta (Metaphysics IX) in the context of Ibn Rushd's commentaries on Metaphysics. Ibn Rushd interpreted the Book of Theta in Talkhīs mā ba'da al-ṭabī'ah based on its meaning and content. Ibn Rushd did not pursue the original composition of Metaphysics in Talkhīs mā ba'da al-ṭabī'ah. However, Ibn Rushd interpreted the Book of Theta in Tafsīr mā ba'da al-ṭabī'ah focusing on the expression and based on the original text. Ibn Rushd pursued the original composition of Metaphysics in Tafsīr mā ba'da al-ṭabī'ah. Thus, Ibn Rushd took advantage of Astat and Isḥāq b. Hunain's arabic translations of the Book of Theta in this interpretation process. Astat and Isḥāq b. Hunain are experts in the translation of Aristotle's works from Greek into Arabic. When Astat and Isḥāq b. Hunain's translation styles are looked at, it is understood that they adhered to the text word by word. In this respect, those translations supported the literary interpretation of Ibn Rushd. On the other hand, Ibn Rushd was influenced by the Greek commentator/Alexander of Aphrodisias in the interpretation of Theta. Alexander of Aphrodisias and Ibn Rushd's interpretation methods based on utterance are similar. In this respect, Ibn Rushd's Commentary of Theta reveals his Aristotelian approach. Makalenin gâyesi, Aristoteles'in Θ/Theta (Metafizik IX.) Kitabı'nın hâricî tarihini İbn Rüşd'ün Metafizik şerhleri bağlamında ortaya koymaktır. İbn Rüşd, Telhîsu Mâ ba'de't-tabî'a'da Theta Kitabı'nı mana ve mahiyetini temel alarak yorumlamış, Metafizik'i oluşturan kitapların özgün dizilimini takip etmemiştir. Buna karşın Tefsîru Mâ ba'de't-tabî'a'da Metafizik'in özgün dizilimini takip etmiş, Θ/Theta Kitabı'nı da orijinal metnini temel alarak ibâre odaklı yorumlamıştır. İbn Rüşd ibâre odaklı yaklaşımı dolayısıyla bu yorum sürecinde Θ/Theta Kitabı'nın Astat/Ustâz/Eustathius-İshak b. Huneyn (ö. M.S. 910) tarafından yapılmış Arapça çevirilerinden yararlanmıştır. Astat ve İshak b. Huneyn, Aristoteles'in eserlerinin doğrudan doğruya Grekçe'den Arapça'ya çevirilerinde ihtisaslaşmış mütercimlerdir. Astat'ın ve İshak b. Huneyn'in çeviri tavırlarına bakıldığında Grekçe metne kelime kelime bağlı kaldıkları görülür. Bu yönden söz konusu çeviriler, İbn Rüşd'ün lafzî yorumunu desteklemiştir. Diğer yandan İbn Rüşd, Θ/Theta Kitabı yorumunda Grek şârih İskender Afrodisî'den etkilenmiştir. İskender Afrodisî ile İbn Rüşd'ün lafzı temel alan şerh etme yöntemleri benzerdir. Bu bakımdan İbn Rüşd'ün Theta Kitabı Şerhi, onun saf Aristotelesçi yaklaşımını ortaya koyar

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5563","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5563,"authors_free":[{"id":6457,"entry_id":5563,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Abd\u00fcrrezzak Sevindik","free_first_name":"Abd\u00fcrrezzak","free_last_name":"Sevindik","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Grek \u015e\u00e2rihlerden \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'e De\u011fin Aristoteles'in Theta (\u0398) Kitab\u0131'n\u0131n H\u00e2ric\u00ee Tarihi","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Grek \u015e\u00e2rihlerden \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'e De\u011fin Aristoteles'in Theta (\u0398) Kitab\u0131'n\u0131n H\u00e2ric\u00ee Tarihi"},"abstract":"The purpose of the article is to discuss the external history of the Book of Theta (Metaphysics IX) in the context of Ibn Rushd's commentaries on Metaphysics. Ibn Rushd interpreted the Book of Theta in Talkh\u012bs m\u0101 ba'da al-\u1e6dab\u012b'ah based on its meaning and content. Ibn Rushd did not pursue the original composition of Metaphysics in Talkh\u012bs m\u0101 ba'da al-\u1e6dab\u012b'ah. However, Ibn Rushd interpreted the Book of Theta in Tafs\u012br m\u0101 ba'da al-\u1e6dab\u012b'ah focusing on the expression and based on the original text. Ibn Rushd pursued the original composition of Metaphysics in Tafs\u012br m\u0101 ba'da al-\u1e6dab\u012b'ah. Thus, Ibn Rushd took advantage of Astat and Is\u1e25\u0101q b. Hunain's arabic translations of the Book of Theta in this interpretation process. Astat and Is\u1e25\u0101q b. Hunain are experts in the translation of Aristotle's works from Greek into Arabic. When Astat and Is\u1e25\u0101q b. Hunain's translation styles are looked at, it is understood that they adhered to the text word by word. In this respect, those translations supported the literary interpretation of Ibn Rushd. On the other hand, Ibn Rushd was influenced by the Greek commentator\/Alexander of Aphrodisias in the interpretation of Theta. Alexander of Aphrodisias and Ibn Rushd's interpretation methods based on utterance are similar. In this respect, Ibn Rushd's Commentary of Theta reveals his Aristotelian approach.\r\n\r\nMakalenin g\u00e2yesi, Aristoteles'in \u0398\/Theta (Metafizik IX.) Kitab\u0131'n\u0131n h\u00e2ric\u00ee tarihini \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'\u00fcn Metafizik \u015ferhleri ba\u011flam\u0131nda ortaya koymakt\u0131r. \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd, Telh\u00eesu M\u00e2 ba'de't-tab\u00ee'a'da Theta Kitab\u0131'n\u0131 mana ve mahiyetini temel alarak yorumlam\u0131\u015f, Metafizik'i olu\u015fturan kitaplar\u0131n \u00f6zg\u00fcn dizilimini takip etmemi\u015ftir. Buna kar\u015f\u0131n Tefs\u00eeru M\u00e2 ba'de't-tab\u00ee'a'da Metafizik'in \u00f6zg\u00fcn dizilimini takip etmi\u015f, \u0398\/Theta Kitab\u0131'n\u0131 da orijinal metnini temel alarak ib\u00e2re odakl\u0131 yorumlam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd ib\u00e2re odakl\u0131 yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu yorum s\u00fcrecinde \u0398\/Theta Kitab\u0131'n\u0131n Astat\/Ust\u00e2z\/Eustathius-\u0130shak b. Huneyn (\u00f6. M.S. 910) taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f Arap\u00e7a \u00e7evirilerinden yararlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Astat ve \u0130shak b. Huneyn, Aristoteles'in eserlerinin do\u011frudan do\u011fruya Grek\u00e7e'den Arap\u00e7a'ya \u00e7evirilerinde ihtisasla\u015fm\u0131\u015f m\u00fctercimlerdir. Astat'\u0131n ve \u0130shak b. Huneyn'in \u00e7eviri tav\u0131rlar\u0131na bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda Grek\u00e7e metne kelime kelime ba\u011fl\u0131 kald\u0131klar\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fcl\u00fcr. Bu y\u00f6nden s\u00f6z konusu \u00e7eviriler, \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'\u00fcn lafz\u00ee yorumunu desteklemi\u015ftir. Di\u011fer yandan \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd, \u0398\/Theta Kitab\u0131 yorumunda Grek \u015f\u00e2rih \u0130skender Afrodis\u00ee'den etkilenmi\u015ftir. \u0130skender Afrodis\u00ee ile \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'\u00fcn lafz\u0131 temel alan \u015ferh etme y\u00f6ntemleri benzerdir. Bu bak\u0131mdan \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'\u00fcn Theta Kitab\u0131 \u015eerhi, onun saf Aristoteles\u00e7i yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koyar","btype":3,"date":"2019","language":"Turkish","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":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"},{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5563,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Sirnak University Journal of Divinity Faculty \/ Sirnak \u00dcniversitesi Ilahiyat Fak\u00fcltesi Dergisi","volume":"10","issue":"23","pages":"469-486"}},"sort":[2019]}

Averroes' Commentary on the de intellectu by Alexander of Aphrodisias: remarks on its contents and influences, 2018
By: Allan Neves
Title Averroes' Commentary on the de intellectu by Alexander of Aphrodisias: remarks on its contents and influences
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2018
Published in
Pages 633-648
Categories Alexander of Aphrodisias, Commentary, Intellect
Author(s) Allan Neves
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5471","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5471,"authors_free":[{"id":6343,"entry_id":5471,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Allan Neves","free_first_name":"Allan","free_last_name":"Neves","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Averroes' Commentary on the de intellectu by Alexander of Aphrodisias: remarks on its contents and influences","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averroes' Commentary on the de intellectu by Alexander of Aphrodisias: remarks on its contents and influences"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2018","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":75,"category_name":"Intellect","link":"bib?categories[]=Intellect"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":{"id":5471,"pubplace":"Kenitra; Sal\u00e9 ","publisher":"Rawafed Center for studies and researches in Maghreb civilization and Mediterranean heritage","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":5471,"section_of":null,"pages":"633-648","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":null},"sort":[2018]}

Ibn Rušd et les Premiers Analytiques d'Aristote. Aperçu sur un problème de syllogistique modale, 1995
By: Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal
Title Ibn Rušd et les Premiers Analytiques d'Aristote. Aperçu sur un problème de syllogistique modale
Type Article
Language French
Date 1995
Journal Arabic Sciences and Philosophy
Volume 5
Pages 51–74
Categories Logic, Alexander of Aphrodisias, al-Fārābī, Aristotle, Commentary
Author(s) Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
Ibn Rušd devoted a certain number of works to Aristotle's Prior Analytics. In a series of opuscules written over a period of twenty years and following upon his Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics, he faced a problem particular to the modal syllogism - that of the mood of the conclusion in mixed syllogisms. The problem can be stated as follows: At the beginning of the Prior Analytics, Aristotle established a formal deductive principle - that of universal attribution (Pr. An. I.1.24b26–30). Applied to the modal syllogism, this principle is inadequate as stated. It is too general to be applied in a univocal manner in all modal syllogisms. To preserve a sense of coherence in Aristotle's declarations, the commentators had to interpret it. Presenting the interpretations of the commentators, primarily al-Fārābī and Alexander, on the basis of al-Fārābī's Large Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics, Averroes criticizes them. Applied according to Alexander's interpretation, the principle of universal attribution is valid only for modal syllogisms one of whose premises is necessary and the other assertoric; according to al-Fārābī's interpretation, it is verified only when the minor premise is possible. Averroes proposes two preliminary solutions. Either this formal deductive principle must be applied differently according to the modal differences of the minor premises in mixed syllogisms (first solution) or would be used in two ways, generally or in keeping with each mood (second solution). These solutions are not satisfactory, for they call into question the unity and universality of the principle of universal attribution as established by Aristotle. What is the utility, Averroes asks, of a principle which does not hold for all modalities or does not apply to all the premises when the Prior Analytics ought to furnish formal and universal principles of deduction? And why did Aristotle define the principle of universal attribution without distinguishing its application according to each of the three modal premises? Returning at the end of his career to a literal exegesis of Aristotle's propositions and without harkening back to the earlier solutions, he proposes a theory of making the terms modal (fourth solution) in order to save Aristotle's declarations with respect to the principle of universal attribution and the mood of the conclusion of mixed syllogisms (Prior Analytics I. 9.30al5–20). Though formally inadequate, this solution, which had a continued history, proposes a new way of looking at the classification of modal propositions.

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"479","_score":null,"_source":{"id":479,"authors_free":[{"id":623,"entry_id":479,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":779,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal","free_first_name":"Abdelali","free_last_name":"Elamrani-Jamal","norm_person":{"id":779,"first_name":"Abdelali","last_name":"Elamrani-Jamal","full_name":"Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/154697621","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/7526121","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal"}}],"entry_title":"Ibn Ru\u0161d et les Premiers Analytiques d'Aristote. Aper\u00e7u sur un probl\u00e8me de syllogistique modale","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Ibn Ru\u0161d et les Premiers Analytiques d'Aristote. Aper\u00e7u sur un probl\u00e8me de syllogistique modale"},"abstract":"Ibn Ru\u0161d devoted a certain number of works to Aristotle's Prior Analytics. In a series of opuscules written over a period of twenty years and following upon his Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics, he faced a problem particular to the modal syllogism - that of the mood of the conclusion in mixed syllogisms. The problem can be stated as follows: At the beginning of the Prior Analytics, Aristotle established a formal deductive principle - that of universal attribution (Pr. An. I.1.24b26\u201330). Applied to the modal syllogism, this principle is inadequate as stated. It is too general to be applied in a univocal manner in all modal syllogisms. To preserve a sense of coherence in Aristotle's declarations, the commentators had to interpret it. Presenting the interpretations of the commentators, primarily al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b and Alexander, on the basis of al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b's Large Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics, Averroes criticizes them. Applied according to Alexander's interpretation, the principle of universal attribution is valid only for modal syllogisms one of whose premises is necessary and the other assertoric; according to al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b's interpretation, it is verified only when the minor premise is possible. Averroes proposes two preliminary solutions. Either this formal deductive principle must be applied differently according to the modal differences of the minor premises in mixed syllogisms (first solution) or would be used in two ways, generally or in keeping with each mood (second solution). These solutions are not satisfactory, for they call into question the unity and universality of the principle of universal attribution as established by Aristotle. What is the utility, Averroes asks, of a principle which does not hold for all modalities or does not apply to all the premises when the Prior Analytics ought to furnish formal and universal principles of deduction? And why did Aristotle define the principle of universal attribution without distinguishing its application according to each of the three modal premises? Returning at the end of his career to a literal exegesis of Aristotle's propositions and without harkening back to the earlier solutions, he proposes a theory of making the terms modal (fourth solution) in order to save Aristotle's declarations with respect to the principle of universal attribution and the mood of the conclusion of mixed syllogisms (Prior Analytics I. 9.30al5\u201320). Though formally inadequate, this solution, which had a continued history, proposes a new way of looking at the classification of modal propositions.","btype":3,"date":"1995","language":"French","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":27,"category_name":"Logic","link":"bib?categories[]=Logic"},{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"},{"id":28,"category_name":"al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b"},{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"}],"authors":[{"id":779,"full_name":"Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":479,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","volume":"5","issue":null,"pages":"51\u201374"}},"sort":[1995]}

Averroes' Commentary on the de intellectu by Alexander of Aphrodisias: remarks on its contents and influences, 2018
By: Allan Neves
Title Averroes' Commentary on the de intellectu by Alexander of Aphrodisias: remarks on its contents and influences
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2018
Published in
Pages 633-648
Categories Alexander of Aphrodisias, Commentary, Intellect
Author(s) Allan Neves
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5471","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5471,"authors_free":[{"id":6343,"entry_id":5471,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Allan Neves","free_first_name":"Allan","free_last_name":"Neves","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Averroes' Commentary on the de intellectu by Alexander of Aphrodisias: remarks on its contents and influences","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averroes' Commentary on the de intellectu by Alexander of Aphrodisias: remarks on its contents and influences"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2018","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":75,"category_name":"Intellect","link":"bib?categories[]=Intellect"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":{"id":5471,"pubplace":"Kenitra; Sal\u00e9 ","publisher":"Rawafed Center for studies and researches in Maghreb civilization and Mediterranean heritage","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":5471,"section_of":null,"pages":"633-648","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":null},"sort":["Averroes' Commentary on the de intellectu by Alexander of Aphrodisias: remarks on its contents and influences"]}

Grek Şârihlerden İbn Rüşd'e Değin Aristoteles'in Theta (Θ) Kitabı'nın Hâricî Tarihi, 2019
By: Abdürrezzak Sevindik
Title Grek Şârihlerden İbn Rüşd'e Değin Aristoteles'in Theta (Θ) Kitabı'nın Hâricî Tarihi
Type Article
Language Turkish
Date 2019
Journal Sirnak University Journal of Divinity Faculty / Sirnak Üniversitesi Ilahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi
Volume 10
Issue 23
Pages 469-486
Categories Aristotle, Commentary, Metaphysics, Alexander of Aphrodisias
Author(s) Abdürrezzak Sevindik
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
The purpose of the article is to discuss the external history of the Book of Theta (Metaphysics IX) in the context of Ibn Rushd's commentaries on Metaphysics. Ibn Rushd interpreted the Book of Theta in Talkhīs mā ba'da al-ṭabī'ah based on its meaning and content. Ibn Rushd did not pursue the original composition of Metaphysics in Talkhīs mā ba'da al-ṭabī'ah. However, Ibn Rushd interpreted the Book of Theta in Tafsīr mā ba'da al-ṭabī'ah focusing on the expression and based on the original text. Ibn Rushd pursued the original composition of Metaphysics in Tafsīr mā ba'da al-ṭabī'ah. Thus, Ibn Rushd took advantage of Astat and Isḥāq b. Hunain's arabic translations of the Book of Theta in this interpretation process. Astat and Isḥāq b. Hunain are experts in the translation of Aristotle's works from Greek into Arabic. When Astat and Isḥāq b. Hunain's translation styles are looked at, it is understood that they adhered to the text word by word. In this respect, those translations supported the literary interpretation of Ibn Rushd. On the other hand, Ibn Rushd was influenced by the Greek commentator/Alexander of Aphrodisias in the interpretation of Theta. Alexander of Aphrodisias and Ibn Rushd's interpretation methods based on utterance are similar. In this respect, Ibn Rushd's Commentary of Theta reveals his Aristotelian approach. Makalenin gâyesi, Aristoteles'in Θ/Theta (Metafizik IX.) Kitabı'nın hâricî tarihini İbn Rüşd'ün Metafizik şerhleri bağlamında ortaya koymaktır. İbn Rüşd, Telhîsu Mâ ba'de't-tabî'a'da Theta Kitabı'nı mana ve mahiyetini temel alarak yorumlamış, Metafizik'i oluşturan kitapların özgün dizilimini takip etmemiştir. Buna karşın Tefsîru Mâ ba'de't-tabî'a'da Metafizik'in özgün dizilimini takip etmiş, Θ/Theta Kitabı'nı da orijinal metnini temel alarak ibâre odaklı yorumlamıştır. İbn Rüşd ibâre odaklı yaklaşımı dolayısıyla bu yorum sürecinde Θ/Theta Kitabı'nın Astat/Ustâz/Eustathius-İshak b. Huneyn (ö. M.S. 910) tarafından yapılmış Arapça çevirilerinden yararlanmıştır. Astat ve İshak b. Huneyn, Aristoteles'in eserlerinin doğrudan doğruya Grekçe'den Arapça'ya çevirilerinde ihtisaslaşmış mütercimlerdir. Astat'ın ve İshak b. Huneyn'in çeviri tavırlarına bakıldığında Grekçe metne kelime kelime bağlı kaldıkları görülür. Bu yönden söz konusu çeviriler, İbn Rüşd'ün lafzî yorumunu desteklemiştir. Diğer yandan İbn Rüşd, Θ/Theta Kitabı yorumunda Grek şârih İskender Afrodisî'den etkilenmiştir. İskender Afrodisî ile İbn Rüşd'ün lafzı temel alan şerh etme yöntemleri benzerdir. Bu bakımdan İbn Rüşd'ün Theta Kitabı Şerhi, onun saf Aristotelesçi yaklaşımını ortaya koyar

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5563","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5563,"authors_free":[{"id":6457,"entry_id":5563,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Abd\u00fcrrezzak Sevindik","free_first_name":"Abd\u00fcrrezzak","free_last_name":"Sevindik","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Grek \u015e\u00e2rihlerden \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'e De\u011fin Aristoteles'in Theta (\u0398) Kitab\u0131'n\u0131n H\u00e2ric\u00ee Tarihi","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Grek \u015e\u00e2rihlerden \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'e De\u011fin Aristoteles'in Theta (\u0398) Kitab\u0131'n\u0131n H\u00e2ric\u00ee Tarihi"},"abstract":"The purpose of the article is to discuss the external history of the Book of Theta (Metaphysics IX) in the context of Ibn Rushd's commentaries on Metaphysics. Ibn Rushd interpreted the Book of Theta in Talkh\u012bs m\u0101 ba'da al-\u1e6dab\u012b'ah based on its meaning and content. Ibn Rushd did not pursue the original composition of Metaphysics in Talkh\u012bs m\u0101 ba'da al-\u1e6dab\u012b'ah. However, Ibn Rushd interpreted the Book of Theta in Tafs\u012br m\u0101 ba'da al-\u1e6dab\u012b'ah focusing on the expression and based on the original text. Ibn Rushd pursued the original composition of Metaphysics in Tafs\u012br m\u0101 ba'da al-\u1e6dab\u012b'ah. Thus, Ibn Rushd took advantage of Astat and Is\u1e25\u0101q b. Hunain's arabic translations of the Book of Theta in this interpretation process. Astat and Is\u1e25\u0101q b. Hunain are experts in the translation of Aristotle's works from Greek into Arabic. When Astat and Is\u1e25\u0101q b. Hunain's translation styles are looked at, it is understood that they adhered to the text word by word. In this respect, those translations supported the literary interpretation of Ibn Rushd. On the other hand, Ibn Rushd was influenced by the Greek commentator\/Alexander of Aphrodisias in the interpretation of Theta. Alexander of Aphrodisias and Ibn Rushd's interpretation methods based on utterance are similar. In this respect, Ibn Rushd's Commentary of Theta reveals his Aristotelian approach.\r\n\r\nMakalenin g\u00e2yesi, Aristoteles'in \u0398\/Theta (Metafizik IX.) Kitab\u0131'n\u0131n h\u00e2ric\u00ee tarihini \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'\u00fcn Metafizik \u015ferhleri ba\u011flam\u0131nda ortaya koymakt\u0131r. \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd, Telh\u00eesu M\u00e2 ba'de't-tab\u00ee'a'da Theta Kitab\u0131'n\u0131 mana ve mahiyetini temel alarak yorumlam\u0131\u015f, Metafizik'i olu\u015fturan kitaplar\u0131n \u00f6zg\u00fcn dizilimini takip etmemi\u015ftir. Buna kar\u015f\u0131n Tefs\u00eeru M\u00e2 ba'de't-tab\u00ee'a'da Metafizik'in \u00f6zg\u00fcn dizilimini takip etmi\u015f, \u0398\/Theta Kitab\u0131'n\u0131 da orijinal metnini temel alarak ib\u00e2re odakl\u0131 yorumlam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd ib\u00e2re odakl\u0131 yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu yorum s\u00fcrecinde \u0398\/Theta Kitab\u0131'n\u0131n Astat\/Ust\u00e2z\/Eustathius-\u0130shak b. Huneyn (\u00f6. M.S. 910) taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f Arap\u00e7a \u00e7evirilerinden yararlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Astat ve \u0130shak b. Huneyn, Aristoteles'in eserlerinin do\u011frudan do\u011fruya Grek\u00e7e'den Arap\u00e7a'ya \u00e7evirilerinde ihtisasla\u015fm\u0131\u015f m\u00fctercimlerdir. Astat'\u0131n ve \u0130shak b. Huneyn'in \u00e7eviri tav\u0131rlar\u0131na bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda Grek\u00e7e metne kelime kelime ba\u011fl\u0131 kald\u0131klar\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fcl\u00fcr. Bu y\u00f6nden s\u00f6z konusu \u00e7eviriler, \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'\u00fcn lafz\u00ee yorumunu desteklemi\u015ftir. Di\u011fer yandan \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd, \u0398\/Theta Kitab\u0131 yorumunda Grek \u015f\u00e2rih \u0130skender Afrodis\u00ee'den etkilenmi\u015ftir. \u0130skender Afrodis\u00ee ile \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'\u00fcn lafz\u0131 temel alan \u015ferh etme y\u00f6ntemleri benzerdir. Bu bak\u0131mdan \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'\u00fcn Theta Kitab\u0131 \u015eerhi, onun saf Aristoteles\u00e7i yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koyar","btype":3,"date":"2019","language":"Turkish","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":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"},{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"}],"authors":[],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5563,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Sirnak University Journal of Divinity Faculty \/ Sirnak \u00dcniversitesi Ilahiyat Fak\u00fcltesi Dergisi","volume":"10","issue":"23","pages":"469-486"}},"sort":["Grek \u015e\u00e2rihlerden \u0130bn R\u00fc\u015fd'e De\u011fin Aristoteles'in Theta (\u0398) Kitab\u0131'n\u0131n H\u00e2ric\u00ee Tarihi"]}

Ibn Rušd et les Premiers Analytiques d'Aristote. Aperçu sur un problème de syllogistique modale, 1995
By: Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal
Title Ibn Rušd et les Premiers Analytiques d'Aristote. Aperçu sur un problème de syllogistique modale
Type Article
Language French
Date 1995
Journal Arabic Sciences and Philosophy
Volume 5
Pages 51–74
Categories Logic, Alexander of Aphrodisias, al-Fārābī, Aristotle, Commentary
Author(s) Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
Ibn Rušd devoted a certain number of works to Aristotle's Prior Analytics. In a series of opuscules written over a period of twenty years and following upon his Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics, he faced a problem particular to the modal syllogism - that of the mood of the conclusion in mixed syllogisms. The problem can be stated as follows: At the beginning of the Prior Analytics, Aristotle established a formal deductive principle - that of universal attribution (Pr. An. I.1.24b26–30). Applied to the modal syllogism, this principle is inadequate as stated. It is too general to be applied in a univocal manner in all modal syllogisms. To preserve a sense of coherence in Aristotle's declarations, the commentators had to interpret it. Presenting the interpretations of the commentators, primarily al-Fārābī and Alexander, on the basis of al-Fārābī's Large Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics, Averroes criticizes them. Applied according to Alexander's interpretation, the principle of universal attribution is valid only for modal syllogisms one of whose premises is necessary and the other assertoric; according to al-Fārābī's interpretation, it is verified only when the minor premise is possible. Averroes proposes two preliminary solutions. Either this formal deductive principle must be applied differently according to the modal differences of the minor premises in mixed syllogisms (first solution) or would be used in two ways, generally or in keeping with each mood (second solution). These solutions are not satisfactory, for they call into question the unity and universality of the principle of universal attribution as established by Aristotle. What is the utility, Averroes asks, of a principle which does not hold for all modalities or does not apply to all the premises when the Prior Analytics ought to furnish formal and universal principles of deduction? And why did Aristotle define the principle of universal attribution without distinguishing its application according to each of the three modal premises? Returning at the end of his career to a literal exegesis of Aristotle's propositions and without harkening back to the earlier solutions, he proposes a theory of making the terms modal (fourth solution) in order to save Aristotle's declarations with respect to the principle of universal attribution and the mood of the conclusion of mixed syllogisms (Prior Analytics I. 9.30al5–20). Though formally inadequate, this solution, which had a continued history, proposes a new way of looking at the classification of modal propositions.

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"479","_score":null,"_source":{"id":479,"authors_free":[{"id":623,"entry_id":479,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":779,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal","free_first_name":"Abdelali","free_last_name":"Elamrani-Jamal","norm_person":{"id":779,"first_name":"Abdelali","last_name":"Elamrani-Jamal","full_name":"Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/154697621","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/7526121","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal"}}],"entry_title":"Ibn Ru\u0161d et les Premiers Analytiques d'Aristote. Aper\u00e7u sur un probl\u00e8me de syllogistique modale","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Ibn Ru\u0161d et les Premiers Analytiques d'Aristote. Aper\u00e7u sur un probl\u00e8me de syllogistique modale"},"abstract":"Ibn Ru\u0161d devoted a certain number of works to Aristotle's Prior Analytics. In a series of opuscules written over a period of twenty years and following upon his Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics, he faced a problem particular to the modal syllogism - that of the mood of the conclusion in mixed syllogisms. The problem can be stated as follows: At the beginning of the Prior Analytics, Aristotle established a formal deductive principle - that of universal attribution (Pr. An. I.1.24b26\u201330). Applied to the modal syllogism, this principle is inadequate as stated. It is too general to be applied in a univocal manner in all modal syllogisms. To preserve a sense of coherence in Aristotle's declarations, the commentators had to interpret it. Presenting the interpretations of the commentators, primarily al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b and Alexander, on the basis of al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b's Large Commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics, Averroes criticizes them. Applied according to Alexander's interpretation, the principle of universal attribution is valid only for modal syllogisms one of whose premises is necessary and the other assertoric; according to al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b's interpretation, it is verified only when the minor premise is possible. Averroes proposes two preliminary solutions. Either this formal deductive principle must be applied differently according to the modal differences of the minor premises in mixed syllogisms (first solution) or would be used in two ways, generally or in keeping with each mood (second solution). These solutions are not satisfactory, for they call into question the unity and universality of the principle of universal attribution as established by Aristotle. What is the utility, Averroes asks, of a principle which does not hold for all modalities or does not apply to all the premises when the Prior Analytics ought to furnish formal and universal principles of deduction? And why did Aristotle define the principle of universal attribution without distinguishing its application according to each of the three modal premises? Returning at the end of his career to a literal exegesis of Aristotle's propositions and without harkening back to the earlier solutions, he proposes a theory of making the terms modal (fourth solution) in order to save Aristotle's declarations with respect to the principle of universal attribution and the mood of the conclusion of mixed syllogisms (Prior Analytics I. 9.30al5\u201320). Though formally inadequate, this solution, which had a continued history, proposes a new way of looking at the classification of modal propositions.","btype":3,"date":"1995","language":"French","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":27,"category_name":"Logic","link":"bib?categories[]=Logic"},{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"},{"id":28,"category_name":"al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b"},{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"}],"authors":[{"id":779,"full_name":"Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":479,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","volume":"5","issue":null,"pages":"51\u201374"}},"sort":["Ibn Ru\u0161d et les Premiers Analytiques d'Aristote. Aper\u00e7u sur un probl\u00e8me de syllogistique modale"]}

New Wine in Old Vessels: Alexander of Aphrodisias as a Source for Averroes’ Metaphysics, 2021
By: Matteo Di Giovanni
Title New Wine in Old Vessels: Alexander of Aphrodisias as a Source for Averroes’ Metaphysics
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 2021
Published in Alexander of Aphrodisias in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance
Pages 59–76
Categories Alexander of Aphrodisias, Commentary, Aristotle, Metaphysics
Author(s) Matteo Di Giovanni
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
Besides his best-known merits as a philosopher, Averroes stands out in the history of the classical tradition as a unique testimony to Alexander’s lost commentary on Metaphysics Lambda and, through it, his interpretation of the argument running through the whole text of the Metaphysics. The gist of this interpretation is laid out in the elaborate prologue to the Lambda commentary that goes back to Alexander and is preserved by Averroes. Building on this textual evidence, the study investigates Averroes’ philosophical appropriation of the Alexander material that is interwoven into the fabric of the former’s exegesis, from the earlier epitome to the later long commentary on the Metaphysics. A number of doctrines turn out to be ultimately inspired by Alexander, including Averroes’ view of the tripartite structure of metaphysics, his notion of book Gamma as an epistemology (“specific logic”) for metaphysics, the function of Delta, the downgrading of both mental and accidental being in Epsilon, and Aristotle’s argument in Zeta. Averroes’ debt to his source is brought to the fore without prejudicing the further question, awaiting future research, of whether Averroes’ acquaintance with Alexander’s line of interpretation was always unmediated or any figures in the philosophical tradition played some role in its transmission.

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5030","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":5030,"authors_free":[{"id":5774,"entry_id":5030,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":734,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Matteo Di Giovanni","free_first_name":"Matteo","free_last_name":"Di Giovanni","norm_person":{"id":734,"first_name":"Matteo","last_name":"Di Giovanni","full_name":"Matteo di Giovanni","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1130687570","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/9497149368819485980007","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Matteo di Giovanni"}}],"entry_title":"New Wine in Old Vessels: Alexander of Aphrodisias as a Source for Averroes\u2019 Metaphysics","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"New Wine in Old Vessels: Alexander of Aphrodisias as a Source for Averroes\u2019 Metaphysics"},"abstract":"Besides his best-known merits as a philosopher, Averroes stands out in the history of the classical tradition as a unique testimony to Alexander\u2019s lost commentary on Metaphysics Lambda and, through it, his interpretation of the argument running through the whole text of the Metaphysics. The gist of this interpretation is laid out in the elaborate prologue to the Lambda commentary that goes back to Alexander and is preserved by Averroes. Building on this textual evidence, the study investigates Averroes\u2019 philosophical appropriation of the Alexander material that is interwoven into the fabric of the former\u2019s exegesis, from the earlier epitome to the later long commentary on the Metaphysics. A number of doctrines turn out to be ultimately inspired by Alexander, including Averroes\u2019 view of the tripartite structure of metaphysics, his notion of book Gamma as an epistemology (\u201cspecific logic\u201d) for metaphysics, the function of Delta, the downgrading of both mental and accidental being in Epsilon, and Aristotle\u2019s argument in Zeta. Averroes\u2019 debt to his source is brought to the fore without prejudicing the further question, awaiting future research, of whether Averroes\u2019 acquaintance with Alexander\u2019s line of interpretation was always unmediated or any figures in the philosophical tradition played some role in its transmission.","btype":2,"date":"2021","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1484\/M.SA-EB.5.120536","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":15,"category_name":"Alexander of Aphrodisias","link":"bib?categories[]=Alexander of Aphrodisias"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"}],"authors":[{"id":734,"full_name":"Matteo di Giovanni","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":{"id":5030,"section_of":5029,"pages":"59\u201376","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":5029,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2021","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"The greatest ancient interpreter of Aristotle, Alexander of Aphrodisias (fl. 200 AD) exerted a profound and enduring influence upon philosophy from Boethius until the modern era. Alexander\u2019s interpretations laid the foundation for multiple philosophical views which were promoted as quintessentially Aristotelian by both Islamic and Latin thinkers throughout the Middle Ages. In the Renaissance, the University of Padua, a leading center of philosophical education and thought, established a scholarly tradition named \u201cAlexandrinism\u201d after him. ","republication_of":0,"online_url":"","online_resources":null,"translation_of":"0","new_edition_of":"0","is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"ti_url":"","doi_url":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1484\/M.SA-EB.5.119428","book":{"id":5029,"pubplace":"Turnhout","publisher":"Brepols","series":"Studia artistarum","volume":"45","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["New Wine in Old Vessels: Alexander of Aphrodisias as a Source for Averroes\u2019 Metaphysics"]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 1