| Title | Averroes against Avicenna on Human Spontaneous Generation: The Starting-Point of a Lasting Debate |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2013 |
| Published in | Renaissance Averroism and Its Aftermath: Arabic Philosophy in Early Modern Europe |
| Pages | 37–54 |
| Categories | Avicenna, Commentary, Metaphysics |
| Author(s) | Amos Bertolacci |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The first criticism of Avicenna in Averroes’s Long Commentary on Metaphysica (II, 993a30-995a20) regards Avicenna’s doctrine of the asexual (so-called ‘spontaneous’) generation of human beings. This criticism is interesting in two main regards. When considered in the general historical context of the confrontation between advocates and opponents of spontaneous generation, the specific debate between Averroes and Avicenna on this issue can be said to have had a long-lasting impact on Latin philosophy up until the Renaissance. Doctrinally, the criticism in question can be taken as a paradigm of Averroes’s more general anti-Avicennian polemic and of the ideological reasons of his dissent towards his illustrious predecessor. In fact, the criticism in questions displays three leitmotivs of Averroes’s dissent towards Avicenna: the harsh tone and the ad personam character of the attack, stressing an error unworthy of Avicenna’s alleged fame in philosophy; the insistence on Avicenna’s agreement and consonance with contemporary thinkers, a fact that in Averroes’s eyes evidences the profound gap separating Avicenna from the ancient masters, depositaries of authentic philosophy; the reproach addressed to Avicenna of being too conversant with, and receptive of, Islamic theology, thus disregarding the requirements of true philosophy. The article shows that in each of these three respects Averroes in fact presents Avicenna’s position in a biased way: indeed Avicenna does not uphold the specific version of human spontaneous generation that Averroes ascribes to him; his doctrine of human spontaneous generation is deeply rooted in ancient philosophy; and his account of this doctrine evidences clear non-religious (and therefore non-theological) traits. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1741","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1741,"authors_free":[{"id":2008,"entry_id":1741,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":815,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Amos Bertolacci","free_first_name":"Amos","free_last_name":"Bertolacci","norm_person":{"id":815,"first_name":"Amos","last_name":"Bertolacci","full_name":"Amos Bertolacci","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/156504006","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/61846437","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Amos Bertolacci"}}],"entry_title":"Averroes against Avicenna on Human Spontaneous Generation: The Starting-Point of a Lasting Debate","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averroes against Avicenna on Human Spontaneous Generation: The Starting-Point of a Lasting Debate"},"abstract":"The first criticism of Avicenna in Averroes\u2019s Long Commentary on Metaphysica (II, 993a30-995a20) regards Avicenna\u2019s doctrine of the asexual (so-called \u2018spontaneous\u2019) generation of human beings. This criticism is interesting in two main regards. When considered in the general historical context of the confrontation between advocates and opponents of spontaneous generation, the specific debate between Averroes and Avicenna on this issue can be said to have had a long-lasting impact on Latin philosophy up until the Renaissance. Doctrinally, the criticism in question can be taken as a paradigm of Averroes\u2019s more general anti-Avicennian polemic and of the ideological reasons of his dissent towards his illustrious predecessor. In fact, the criticism in questions displays three leitmotivs of Averroes\u2019s dissent towards Avicenna: the harsh tone and the ad personam character of the attack, stressing an error unworthy of Avicenna\u2019s alleged fame in philosophy; the insistence on Avicenna\u2019s agreement and consonance with contemporary thinkers, a fact that in Averroes\u2019s eyes evidences the profound gap separating Avicenna from the ancient masters, depositaries of authentic philosophy; the reproach addressed to Avicenna of being too conversant with, and receptive of, Islamic theology, thus disregarding the requirements of true philosophy. The article shows that in each of these three respects Averroes in fact presents Avicenna\u2019s position in a biased way: indeed Avicenna does not uphold the specific version of human spontaneous generation that Averroes ascribes to him; his doctrine of human spontaneous generation is deeply rooted in ancient philosophy; and his account of this doctrine evidences clear non-religious (and therefore non-theological) traits.","btype":2,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"10.1007\/978-94-007-5240-5_2","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":10,"category_name":"Avicenna","link":"bib?categories[]=Avicenna"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"}],"authors":[{"id":815,"full_name":"Amos Bertolacci","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1741,"section_of":241,"pages":"37\u201354","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":241,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":null,"title":"Renaissance Averroism and Its Aftermath: Arabic Philosophy in Early Modern Europe","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"short_title":null,"has_no_author":0,"volume":null,"date":"2013","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2013","abstract":null,"republication_of":null,"online_url":null,"online_resources":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"ti_url":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":241,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Springer","series":"International Archives of the History of Ideas","volume":"211","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2013]}
| Title | Averroes against Avicenna on Human Spontaneous Generation: The Starting-Point of a Lasting Debate |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2013 |
| Published in | Renaissance Averroism and Its Aftermath: Arabic Philosophy in Early Modern Europe |
| Pages | 37–54 |
| Categories | Avicenna, Commentary, Metaphysics |
| Author(s) | Amos Bertolacci |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The first criticism of Avicenna in Averroes’s Long Commentary on Metaphysica (II, 993a30-995a20) regards Avicenna’s doctrine of the asexual (so-called ‘spontaneous’) generation of human beings. This criticism is interesting in two main regards. When considered in the general historical context of the confrontation between advocates and opponents of spontaneous generation, the specific debate between Averroes and Avicenna on this issue can be said to have had a long-lasting impact on Latin philosophy up until the Renaissance. Doctrinally, the criticism in question can be taken as a paradigm of Averroes’s more general anti-Avicennian polemic and of the ideological reasons of his dissent towards his illustrious predecessor. In fact, the criticism in questions displays three leitmotivs of Averroes’s dissent towards Avicenna: the harsh tone and the ad personam character of the attack, stressing an error unworthy of Avicenna’s alleged fame in philosophy; the insistence on Avicenna’s agreement and consonance with contemporary thinkers, a fact that in Averroes’s eyes evidences the profound gap separating Avicenna from the ancient masters, depositaries of authentic philosophy; the reproach addressed to Avicenna of being too conversant with, and receptive of, Islamic theology, thus disregarding the requirements of true philosophy. The article shows that in each of these three respects Averroes in fact presents Avicenna’s position in a biased way: indeed Avicenna does not uphold the specific version of human spontaneous generation that Averroes ascribes to him; his doctrine of human spontaneous generation is deeply rooted in ancient philosophy; and his account of this doctrine evidences clear non-religious (and therefore non-theological) traits. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1741","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1741,"authors_free":[{"id":2008,"entry_id":1741,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":815,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Amos Bertolacci","free_first_name":"Amos","free_last_name":"Bertolacci","norm_person":{"id":815,"first_name":"Amos","last_name":"Bertolacci","full_name":"Amos Bertolacci","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/156504006","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/61846437","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Amos Bertolacci"}}],"entry_title":"Averroes against Avicenna on Human Spontaneous Generation: The Starting-Point of a Lasting Debate","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Averroes against Avicenna on Human Spontaneous Generation: The Starting-Point of a Lasting Debate"},"abstract":"The first criticism of Avicenna in Averroes\u2019s Long Commentary on Metaphysica (II, 993a30-995a20) regards Avicenna\u2019s doctrine of the asexual (so-called \u2018spontaneous\u2019) generation of human beings. This criticism is interesting in two main regards. When considered in the general historical context of the confrontation between advocates and opponents of spontaneous generation, the specific debate between Averroes and Avicenna on this issue can be said to have had a long-lasting impact on Latin philosophy up until the Renaissance. Doctrinally, the criticism in question can be taken as a paradigm of Averroes\u2019s more general anti-Avicennian polemic and of the ideological reasons of his dissent towards his illustrious predecessor. In fact, the criticism in questions displays three leitmotivs of Averroes\u2019s dissent towards Avicenna: the harsh tone and the ad personam character of the attack, stressing an error unworthy of Avicenna\u2019s alleged fame in philosophy; the insistence on Avicenna\u2019s agreement and consonance with contemporary thinkers, a fact that in Averroes\u2019s eyes evidences the profound gap separating Avicenna from the ancient masters, depositaries of authentic philosophy; the reproach addressed to Avicenna of being too conversant with, and receptive of, Islamic theology, thus disregarding the requirements of true philosophy. The article shows that in each of these three respects Averroes in fact presents Avicenna\u2019s position in a biased way: indeed Avicenna does not uphold the specific version of human spontaneous generation that Averroes ascribes to him; his doctrine of human spontaneous generation is deeply rooted in ancient philosophy; and his account of this doctrine evidences clear non-religious (and therefore non-theological) traits.","btype":2,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","doi_url":"10.1007\/978-94-007-5240-5_2","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":10,"category_name":"Avicenna","link":"bib?categories[]=Avicenna"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"}],"authors":[{"id":815,"full_name":"Amos Bertolacci","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1741,"section_of":241,"pages":"37\u201354","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":241,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":null,"title":"Renaissance Averroism and Its Aftermath: Arabic Philosophy in Early Modern Europe","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"short_title":null,"has_no_author":0,"volume":null,"date":"2013","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2013","abstract":null,"republication_of":null,"online_url":null,"online_resources":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"ti_url":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":241,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Springer","series":"International Archives of the History of Ideas","volume":"211","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Averroes against Avicenna on Human Spontaneous Generation: The Starting-Point of a Lasting Debate"]}