Essence, accident et nécessité: la notion de par soi chez Averroès, 2016
By: Cristina Cerami
Title Essence, accident et nécessité: la notion de par soi chez Averroès
Type Article
Language French
Date 2016
Journal Les Études Philosophiques
Volume 117
Issue 2
Pages 217–241
Categories Aristotle, Ontology, Commentary, Logic
Author(s) Cristina Cerami
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
The notion of “per se” (καθ’ αὑτό) is one of the key elements of Aristotle’s ontology and epistemology. Nowhere, however, does Aristotle provide a systematic study of it, leaving the articulation of its different meanings and the significance of the general project in which this notion is inscribed unclear. This paper aims to study the interpretation that Averroes provides of this notion in his Long Commentary on the Posterior Analytics. In translating for the first time some long quotations of this commentary into a modern language, we will show the central role that this notion plays in Averroes’ scientific theory and in particular in his theory of demonstration of sign.

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5222","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5222,"authors_free":[{"id":6025,"entry_id":5222,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1285,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Cristina Cerami","free_first_name":"Cristina","free_last_name":"Cerami","norm_person":{"id":1285,"first_name":"Cristina","last_name":"Cerami","full_name":"Cristina Cerami","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139713840","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/317111513","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Cristina Cerami"}}],"entry_title":"Essence, accident et n\u00e9cessit\u00e9: la notion de par soi chez Averro\u00e8s","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Essence, accident et n\u00e9cessit\u00e9: la notion de par soi chez Averro\u00e8s"},"abstract":"The notion of \u201cper se\u201d (\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u2019 \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u03cc) is one of the key elements of Aristotle\u2019s ontology and epistemology. Nowhere, however, does Aristotle provide a systematic study of it, leaving the articulation of its different meanings and the significance of the general project in which this notion is inscribed unclear. This paper aims to study the interpretation that Averroes provides of this notion in his Long Commentary on the Posterior Analytics. In translating for the first time some long quotations of this commentary into a modern language, we will show the central role that this notion plays in Averroes\u2019 scientific theory and in particular in his theory of demonstration of sign. ","btype":3,"date":"2016","language":"French","online_url":"","doi_url":" https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3917\/leph.162.0217 ","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":65,"category_name":"Ontology","link":"bib?categories[]=Ontology"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":27,"category_name":"Logic","link":"bib?categories[]=Logic"}],"authors":[{"id":1285,"full_name":"Cristina Cerami","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5222,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Les \u00c9tudes Philosophiques","volume":"117","issue":"2","pages":"217\u2013241"}},"sort":[2016]}

Thomas d'Aquin lecteur critique du Grand Commentaire d'Averroès à Phys. I, 1, 2009
By: Cristina Cerami
Title Thomas d'Aquin lecteur critique du Grand Commentaire d'Averroès à Phys. I, 1
Type Article
Language French
Date 2009
Journal Arabic Sciences and Philosophy
Volume 19
Issue 2
Pages 189–223
Categories Thomas, Commentary, Physics, Tradition and Reception
Author(s) Cristina Cerami
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
The present article aims to provide a reconstruction of the interpretation offered by Thomas Aquinas of the cognitive process described at the beginning of Aristotle's Physics and of his criticism of Averroes' interpretation. It expounds to this end the exegesis of ancient Greek commentators who opened the debate on this question; then, it puts forward a reconstruction of Aquinas' doctrine by means of other texts of his corpus, as well as an explanation of his criticism of Averroes' exegesis; it finally reconstructs Averroes' interpretation worked out in his Great Commentary to Phys. I, 1, in order to show that Aquinas' disapproval is partly due to an incorrect interpretation of Averroes' divisio textus of Phys. I, 1. It suggests as well that, concerning some fundamental points, Aquinas' exegesis doesn't diverge from the interpretation proposed by Averroes.

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1382","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1382,"authors_free":[{"id":1574,"entry_id":1382,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1285,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Cristina Cerami","free_first_name":"Cristina","free_last_name":"Cerami","norm_person":{"id":1285,"first_name":"Cristina","last_name":"Cerami","full_name":"Cristina Cerami","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139713840","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/317111513","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Cristina Cerami"}}],"entry_title":"Thomas d'Aquin lecteur critique du Grand Commentaire d'Averro\u00e8s \u00e0 Phys. I, 1","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Thomas d'Aquin lecteur critique du Grand Commentaire d'Averro\u00e8s \u00e0 Phys. I, 1"},"abstract":"The present article aims to provide a reconstruction of the interpretation offered by Thomas Aquinas of the cognitive process described at the beginning of Aristotle's Physics and of his criticism of Averroes' interpretation. It expounds to this end the exegesis of ancient Greek commentators who opened the debate on this question; then, it puts forward a reconstruction of Aquinas' doctrine by means of other texts of his corpus, as well as an explanation of his criticism of Averroes' exegesis; it finally reconstructs Averroes' interpretation worked out in his Great Commentary to Phys. I, 1, in order to show that Aquinas' disapproval is partly due to an incorrect interpretation of Averroes' divisio textus of Phys. I, 1. It suggests as well that, concerning some fundamental points, Aquinas' exegesis doesn't diverge from the interpretation proposed by Averroes.","btype":3,"date":"2009","language":"French","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":51,"category_name":"Thomas","link":"bib?categories[]=Thomas"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":37,"category_name":"Physics","link":"bib?categories[]=Physics"},{"id":43,"category_name":"Tradition and Reception","link":"bib?categories[]=Tradition and Reception"}],"authors":[{"id":1285,"full_name":"Cristina Cerami","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1382,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","volume":"19","issue":"2","pages":"189\u2013223"}},"sort":[2009]}

Essence, accident et nécessité: la notion de par soi chez Averroès, 2016
By: Cristina Cerami
Title Essence, accident et nécessité: la notion de par soi chez Averroès
Type Article
Language French
Date 2016
Journal Les Études Philosophiques
Volume 117
Issue 2
Pages 217–241
Categories Aristotle, Ontology, Commentary, Logic
Author(s) Cristina Cerami
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
The notion of “per se” (καθ’ αὑτό) is one of the key elements of Aristotle’s ontology and epistemology. Nowhere, however, does Aristotle provide a systematic study of it, leaving the articulation of its different meanings and the significance of the general project in which this notion is inscribed unclear. This paper aims to study the interpretation that Averroes provides of this notion in his Long Commentary on the Posterior Analytics. In translating for the first time some long quotations of this commentary into a modern language, we will show the central role that this notion plays in Averroes’ scientific theory and in particular in his theory of demonstration of sign.

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"5222","_score":null,"_source":{"id":5222,"authors_free":[{"id":6025,"entry_id":5222,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1285,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Cristina Cerami","free_first_name":"Cristina","free_last_name":"Cerami","norm_person":{"id":1285,"first_name":"Cristina","last_name":"Cerami","full_name":"Cristina Cerami","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139713840","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/317111513","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Cristina Cerami"}}],"entry_title":"Essence, accident et n\u00e9cessit\u00e9: la notion de par soi chez Averro\u00e8s","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"Essence, accident et n\u00e9cessit\u00e9: la notion de par soi chez Averro\u00e8s"},"abstract":"The notion of \u201cper se\u201d (\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u2019 \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u03cc) is one of the key elements of Aristotle\u2019s ontology and epistemology. Nowhere, however, does Aristotle provide a systematic study of it, leaving the articulation of its different meanings and the significance of the general project in which this notion is inscribed unclear. This paper aims to study the interpretation that Averroes provides of this notion in his Long Commentary on the Posterior Analytics. In translating for the first time some long quotations of this commentary into a modern language, we will show the central role that this notion plays in Averroes\u2019 scientific theory and in particular in his theory of demonstration of sign. ","btype":3,"date":"2016","language":"French","online_url":"","doi_url":" https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3917\/leph.162.0217 ","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":65,"category_name":"Ontology","link":"bib?categories[]=Ontology"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":27,"category_name":"Logic","link":"bib?categories[]=Logic"}],"authors":[{"id":1285,"full_name":"Cristina Cerami","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":5222,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Les \u00c9tudes Philosophiques","volume":"117","issue":"2","pages":"217\u2013241"}},"sort":["Essence, accident et n\u00e9cessit\u00e9: la notion de par soi chez Averro\u00e8s"]}

Thomas d'Aquin lecteur critique du Grand Commentaire d'Averroès à Phys. I, 1, 2009
By: Cristina Cerami
Title Thomas d'Aquin lecteur critique du Grand Commentaire d'Averroès à Phys. I, 1
Type Article
Language French
Date 2009
Journal Arabic Sciences and Philosophy
Volume 19
Issue 2
Pages 189–223
Categories Thomas, Commentary, Physics, Tradition and Reception
Author(s) Cristina Cerami
Publisher(s)
Translator(s)
The present article aims to provide a reconstruction of the interpretation offered by Thomas Aquinas of the cognitive process described at the beginning of Aristotle's Physics and of his criticism of Averroes' interpretation. It expounds to this end the exegesis of ancient Greek commentators who opened the debate on this question; then, it puts forward a reconstruction of Aquinas' doctrine by means of other texts of his corpus, as well as an explanation of his criticism of Averroes' exegesis; it finally reconstructs Averroes' interpretation worked out in his Great Commentary to Phys. I, 1, in order to show that Aquinas' disapproval is partly due to an incorrect interpretation of Averroes' divisio textus of Phys. I, 1. It suggests as well that, concerning some fundamental points, Aquinas' exegesis doesn't diverge from the interpretation proposed by Averroes.

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1382","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1382,"authors_free":[{"id":1574,"entry_id":1382,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1285,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Cristina Cerami","free_first_name":"Cristina","free_last_name":"Cerami","norm_person":{"id":1285,"first_name":"Cristina","last_name":"Cerami","full_name":"Cristina Cerami","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139713840","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/317111513","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Cristina Cerami"}}],"entry_title":"Thomas d'Aquin lecteur critique du Grand Commentaire d'Averro\u00e8s \u00e0 Phys. I, 1","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Thomas d'Aquin lecteur critique du Grand Commentaire d'Averro\u00e8s \u00e0 Phys. I, 1"},"abstract":"The present article aims to provide a reconstruction of the interpretation offered by Thomas Aquinas of the cognitive process described at the beginning of Aristotle's Physics and of his criticism of Averroes' interpretation. It expounds to this end the exegesis of ancient Greek commentators who opened the debate on this question; then, it puts forward a reconstruction of Aquinas' doctrine by means of other texts of his corpus, as well as an explanation of his criticism of Averroes' exegesis; it finally reconstructs Averroes' interpretation worked out in his Great Commentary to Phys. I, 1, in order to show that Aquinas' disapproval is partly due to an incorrect interpretation of Averroes' divisio textus of Phys. I, 1. It suggests as well that, concerning some fundamental points, Aquinas' exegesis doesn't diverge from the interpretation proposed by Averroes.","btype":3,"date":"2009","language":"French","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":51,"category_name":"Thomas","link":"bib?categories[]=Thomas"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"},{"id":37,"category_name":"Physics","link":"bib?categories[]=Physics"},{"id":43,"category_name":"Tradition and Reception","link":"bib?categories[]=Tradition and Reception"}],"authors":[{"id":1285,"full_name":"Cristina Cerami","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1382,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","volume":"19","issue":"2","pages":"189\u2013223"}},"sort":["Thomas d'Aquin lecteur critique du Grand Commentaire d'Averro\u00e8s \u00e0 Phys. I, 1"]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 1