Scotus’s Interpretation of Metaphysics 9.2

Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 81:217-230 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to explain Scotus’s transformation of the Aristotelian view on the difference between rational and irrational potencies. In Metaphysics 9, 2 Aristotle establishes the distinction between rational and nonrational powers and explains their difference in terms of their being ad opposita and ad unum, respectively. In his interpretation Scotus concludes that the most basic division between active principles is the difference between nature and will, rather than the difference between univocal and equivocal agents. Thus, the Aristotelian distinction between rational and non-rational powers has now become a distinction between nature and will. And the criterion for such a difference no longer lies in the contrast between ad unum and ad opposita, but rather is based on the twofold way the potencies can elicit their acts. Therefore, according to Scotus, the key difference between nature and will is the distinction between autonomy and heteronomy.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,836

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Distinction between Nature and Will in Duns Scotus.Tobias Hoffmann - 1999 - Archives D’Histoire Doctrinale Et Littéraire du Moyen Âge 66:189-224.
How Aristotelian is Contemporary Dispositionalist Metaphysics? A Tale of Two Distinctions.Errin D. Clark - 2014 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 88:85-99.
Hegel and Aquinas on Self-Knowledge and Historicity.Michael Baur - 1994 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 68:125-134.
Hegel’s Ontological Pluralism.Raoni Padui - 2013 - Review of Metaphysics 67 (1):125-148.
The Beliefs and Intentions of Buridan's Ass.Nathaniel Sharadin & Finnur Dellsén - 2017 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 3 (2):209-226.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-12-01

Downloads
74 (#301,326)

6 months
6 (#695,703)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references