| 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, 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"]}