Journal Name: Philologus Issue: Ahead of print.

Em República 377a Sócrates diz que as fábulas (mythos) são, no todo, falsas, mas possuem, alguma verdade. Diante dessa falsidade geral, a tentativa será de entender melhor onde estaria, de que modo se apresentaria e de que tipo seria essa verdade. Para tanto, será necessário tentar responder se falsidade e verdade podem ocorrer num mesmo lugar e, se a resposta for afirmativa, de que tipo é a sua relação. No âmbito dos conceitos de pano de fundo será preciso verificar se (...) há uma teoria da correspondência da verdade ou não e uma teoria do conhecimento por contato ou proposicional. Essas respostas permitirão identificar se verdade e falsidade possuem o mesmo objeto e qual é o objeto de uma fábula. Todo esse percurso deve gerar uma concepção de fábula condizente para ser o primeiro instrumento educacional na formação das crianças. Os resultados apontam para um tipo de híbrido verdade e falsidade que não se encaixa nas categorias dos diálogos platônicos. Palavras-chave: Verdade; Mentira; República; Fábulas; Platão. How can fables be generally false and yet contain some truth? A reflection on the Republic 377a Abstract: In Republic 377a Socrates says that fables (mythos) are, on the whole, false, but they possess some truth. In the face of this general falsity, the attempt will be to understand better where this truth would be, how it would be presented and what kind of truth it would be. To do so, it will be necessary to try to answer if falsehood and truth can occur in the same place and, if the answer is affirmative, of which type is their relationship. In the context of background concepts, it will be necessary to verify whether there is a correspondence theory of truth and if there is a theory of propositional knowledge or knowledge by acquaintance. These answers will allow to explore whether truth and falsehood have the same object and what is the object of a fable. This conclusion should generate a conception of a fable that is suitable to be the first educational tool in forming children. The results point to a type of hybrid truth and falsehood that does not fit into the categories of Platonic dialogues. Key-words: Truth; Lie; Republic; Fables; Plato. Comment les fables peuvent-elles être généralement fausses et contenir une part de vérité? Une réflexion sur la République 377a Résumé : Dans la République 377a, Socrate affirme que les fables (mythos) sont, dans l'ensemble, fausses, mais qu'elles possèdent une part de vérité. Face à cette fausseté générale, on cherchera à mieux comprendre où se trouverait cette vérité, comment elle se présenterait et de quel type de vérité il s'agirait. Pour ce faire, il faudra essayer de répondre à la question de savoir si la fausseté et la vérité peuvent se trouver au même endroit et, si la réponse est affirmative, de quel type est leur relation. Dans le contexte des concepts de base, il sera nécessaire de vérifier s'il existe une théorie de la correspondance de la vérité et s'il existe une théorie de la connaissance propositionnelle ou de la connaissance par accointance. Ces réponses permettront d'explorer si la vérité et la fausseté ont le même objet et quel est l'objet d'une fable. L'ensemble de ce parcours devrait générer une conception de la fable qui soit apte à être le premier outil éducatif dans la formation des enfants. Les résultats indiquent un type de vérité et de fausseté hybride qui n'entre pas dans les catégories des dialogues platoniciens. Mots clés: Vérité; Mensonge; République; Fables; Platon. Data de registro: 01/08/2023 Data de aceite: 12/06/2024. (shrink)

Sono certo sarebbe stato più prudente iniziare e concludere questa mia lectio prestando fede – e mettendo in pratica – quanto scrive Ludwig Wittgenstein nel 1932 in Pensieri diversi, quando dice: «In arte è difficile dire qualcosa che sia altrettanto buono del non dire niente». Ma tant’è: nelle cose del mondo, quando non si può negare una certa vanità, ci si inerpica spesso per sentieri difficili e impervi. M’incammino quindi, con qualche titubanza, nel tentativo di indicare il mio modo (...) di e... (shrink)

De nature homilétique, la prédication de Calvin suit le principe de la lectio continua, proche du commentaire des lectiones. Le réformateur mentionne souvent les philosophes, de manière positive pour les savoirs qu’ils représentent, mais aussi pour les critiquer. La philosophie et les philosophes sont des réalités ambivalentes, comme dans l’ Institution de la religion chrestienne, et désignent les savoirs humains sur le monde et sur l’homme en tant qu’on peut ou qu’on ose envisager ces réalités comme indépendantes de Dieu. (...) Les plus grands éloges de la philosophie donnent lieu aux condamnations les plus vives. Calvin utilise aussi la désignation de philosophes pour critiquer des adversaires contemporains : d’une part la théologie scolastique et tridentine, d’autre part les « moyenneurs » érasmiens. Le réformateur oppose les deux « styles », celui de la philosophie et celui de la révélation scripturaire, à la fois comme deux méthodes discursives, deux styles au sens littéraire, et deux stratégies : seules les Écritures saintes sont capables de conduire efficacement à la vraie sagesse (chrétienne). (shrink)

Cet ouvrage se présente comme une introduction d'histoire littéraire et doctrinale au premier volume de l'édition critique des oeuvres de Hugues de Saint-Victor. Il exploite les données fournies par l'étude de la tradition manuscrite du De archa Noe et du Libellus de formatione arche, qui aboutissent à une perception et à une reception renouvellées de ces traîtés. Du premier ouvrage on a tenté, non seulement une histoire, mais une préhistoire: car il a connu un stade oral, celui de collationes dont (...) on aura pu cerner au plus près le contenu avant de reconstituer les procédés rédactionnels du maître victorin. Au cours de ces entretiens du cloître une pédagogie de l'image avait été mise en oeuvre, utilisée conjointement avec la parole. Et de même que la parole donna naissance à une oeuvre écrite (le De archa Noe), de même le dessin qui l'accompagnait est donné sous une forme littéraire, par un écrit qui en livre les modalités concrètes de réalisation (le Libellus). Le statut de cet écrit, longtemps incertain ou atypique, fut originellement celui d'un appendice, distinct mais non disjoint du De archa. Le Libellus est transmis par la tradition manuscrite en deux états: une version brève et une version longue. Le réviseur en fut le victorin lui-même, dont la psychologie d'auteur est ainsi pour une part dévoilée. Un chapitre propose des compléments ou des précisions touchant la datation relative des oeuvres du victorin. L'image employée par maitre Hugues avait été support de ce que l'on pourrait appeler exégèse visuelle. L'histoire du salut, telle qu'elle est représentée dans la figuration de l'arche de Noé, est méditée selon les trois sens scriptuaires médiévaux, qui correspondent en outre à une série d'exercices spirituels, selon la séquence lectio-meditatio-speculatio-contemplatio. Des considérations d'herméneutique (l'image. (shrink)

L’objectif de cet article n’est pas d’étudier les relations complexes que les pensées de Sartre et Merleau-Ponty entretiennent avec la psychanalyse – tâche qui exige à elle seule tout un livre –, mais uniquement de montrer que leur traitement respectif de la subjectivité entretient des rapports frontaliers, parfois conflictuels, avec la problématisation psychanalytique de l’inconscient. C’est donc seulement dans la perspective du problème très général de la « conscience fausse » que seront abordés ces emprunts et échanges sinueux. De ce (...) point de vue, il est nécessaire de préciser le sens attribué à la notion de « conscience » par Sartre et par Merleau-Ponty et, conjointement, le statut qu’ils accordent respectivement à l’inconscient. Le dissensus qui sépare les deux auteurs trouve d’abord sa source dans la fonction et les limites qu’ils assignent à la réflexion.The goal of this article is not to discuss the complex relationship between the works of Sartre and Merleau-Ponty and psychoanalysis—such a subject would deserve an entire book—but rather to show that their respective treatments of subjectivity are closely related, sometimes conflicting, with the psychoanalytic problematization of the unconscious. It is therefore only in the perspective of the general problem of false consciousness that these references and sinuous exchanges will be presented. From this point of view, it is necessary to pinpoint the meaning attributed to the notion of ‘consciousness’ by Sartre and Merleau-Ponty, and conjointly, the status they accord respectively to the unconscious. The disparity between these two philosophers originates in the function and limits they assign to reflection.L’obiettivo di questo articolo non è quello di studiare le complesse relazioni che Sartre e Merleau-Ponty intrattengono con la psicoanalisi – cosa che esigerebbe un libro a sé – ma solo di mostrare che il loro modo di trattare il tema della soggettività intrattiene rapporti di frontiera, talvolta conflittuali, con la problematica psicoanalitica dell’inconscio. Affronteremo il movimento sinuoso di questi prestiti e di questi scambi nella sola prospettiva del problema molto generale della “falsa coscienza”. Da questo punto di vista, sarà necessario precisare il senso attribuito da Sartre e da Merleau-Ponty alla nozione di coscienza e, insieme, a quella di inconscio. Mostreremo quindi che il dissidio tra i due autori trova la sua origine anzitutto nella diversa funzione e nei diversi limiti che essi assegnano alla dimensione della riflessione. (shrink)

En el presente artículo se discuten brevemente las tres variantes, ofrecidas por la tradición, del adjetivo que califica ἀληθείη en el fr. DK28 B1.29 de Parménides, es decir, εὐφεγγέος, εὐπειθέος y εὐκυκλέος, buscando sobre todo aclarar la última de éstas. Dicha lectura ha sido acogida por algunos editores del Poema no sólo por ser considerada la lectio difficilior, sino también debido a la autoridad de quien la ha transmitido, Simplicio, y a la conexión que emerge con la imagen de (...) la esfera del fragmento B8. Se presenta a continuación un breve estudio sobre el adjetivo εὔκυκλος y su significación en la poesía arcaica griega y finalmente se intenta dar una posible respuesta a la pregunta de por qué la diosa habría calificado de “bien redonda” la verdad. (shrink)

Le rapprochement des œuvres de Machiavel et de Bodin a déjà une longue histoire, à laquelle l’intention de cet article n’est pas d’ajouter un chapitre : il ne s’agit donc pas de proposer une lecture d’ensemble du rapport entre ces deux auteurs ou entre leurs doctrines générales, mais seulement de mettre en parallèle leurs conceptions d’une certaine méthode pour interpréter les histoires, conceptions qui se laissent lire d’une part dans l’épître dédicatoire et le proemio des Discorsi sopra la prima deca (...) di Tito Livio de Machiavel (ca. 1518) et d’autre part dans l’épître dédicatoire et le proemium de la Methodus ad facilem historiarum cognitionem de Bodin (1566). À un demi-siècle d’écart, ces deux prologues mettent en effet en évidence le caractère indispensable d’un art de la lectio des histoires pour fonder les raisonnements de la science politique, mais ils le font, semble-t-il, en adoptant deux points de vue profondément différents : la nature exacte de cette différence est le véritable objet de cet article. (shrink)

The Cogito and the Mexican Salamander.Philosophy and the Rest of Sciences in the late Merleau-Ponty The article examines Merleau-Ponty’s almost parallel reading – in his last courses at the Collège de France – of the Cartesian cogito and the development of the Axolotl, the salamander studied by American biologist Coghill. My hypothesis is that the metaphysics of the cogito and the biology of the Axolotl represented for Merleau-Ponty two ways of access to the same discovery. Descartes came up against a (...) phenomenon, the cogito, which required the reshaping of metaphysics as a sort of (impossible) psychology of the event or the absolute. Within the field of anatomy, Coghill came up against a phenomenon, the embryogenesis of the Axolotl, which similarly required a sort of conversion of anatomy into embryology. Therefore, bios and psyché, “embryonality” and the cogito, would be nothing but the denomination of the objects that psychology and biology meet along their borders, names for what we could refer to as “event,” “continuum,” “becoming” or, according to an old but still suitable definition, “absolute.” This has countless consequences on the relationship between the so-called human sciences and the so-called natural sciences, their eternally missed dialogue, their false complementarity and the illusion that the famous “two cultures” do actually exist.Il Cogito e la lucertola messicana.La filosofia e il resto delle scienze nell’ultimo Merleau-Ponty L’articolo prende in esame la lettura quasi parallela che Merleau-Ponty svolge, negli ultimi corsi di lezione al Collège de France, del cogito cartesiano e dello sviluppo dell’Axolotl, la lucertola studiata dal biologo americano Coghill. La nostra ipotesi è che la metafisica del cogito, e la biologia dell’Axolotl, rappresentino agli occhi di Merleau-Ponty due modi d’accesso a una stessa scoperta. Dall’interno della metafisica, Descartes si imbatte in un fenomeno, il cogito appunto, che esige che la metafisica si istituisca come una sorta di (impossibile) psicologia dell’eventoo dell’assoluto. Tutta la metafisica sarebbe psicologia, cioè indicazione del luogo assoluto nel quale è inscritto ogni luogo. Dall’interno dell’anatomia, Coghill siimbatte in un fenomeno, lo sviluppo dell’embrione dell’Axolotl, che esige analogamente che tutta l’anatomia si risolva in embriologia. Il vivente sarebbe allora in generale questa condizione di gemmazione e autoorganizzazione, e l’embriologia sarebbe la scienza (impossibile) di questo divenire perfettamenteanoggettuale. Bios e psyché, “embrionalità” e cogito non sarebbero che i nomi di ciò che la psicologia e la biologia incontrano al loro confine, nomi di ciò che infilosofia si chiama evento, continuum, divenire, o, con un vecchio e adattissimo termine, assoluto. Il che comporta innumerevoli conseguenze circa il rapporto trale cosiddette scienze umane e le cosiddette scienze naturali, sul loro dialogo eternamente mancato, sulla loro falsa complementarietà, sull’illusione che si diano davvero le celebri “due culture”. (shrink)

The way in which early followers of St. Thomas Aquinas interpreted or misinterpreted his metaphysical doctrines and works still needs much exploration, so a text edition and editor’s commentary of this kind is a most welcomed project, especially since Conrad of Prussia has possibly left us the earliest commentary on Aquinas’ De ente et essentia. The editing task is a precarious work, however, since Conrad’s commentary survives in only one known manuscript, located in the monastery library at Admont, Austria. The (...) editors’ printed result thus has a number of flaws, but without a copy of the codex it is impossible to say which derive from the manuscript and which from the editors. Without a text a reviewer cannot legitimately correct, but can only suggest alternatives to evident mistakes. In the first lectio there is a very humorous flaw. Conrad is trying to prove that little mistakes can sometimes lead to big ones. The edited text illustrates: "omnis canis creditur, celeste sydus est canis, ergo celeste sidus creditur. Interum: quidquid creditur, habet pedes; celeste sydus, ut dictum est, creditur; ergo habet pedes. Ecce quot inconvenientia sequuntur ex uno modico errore." Creditur makes no sense: "Every dog is believed."? Currit does make sense: "Every dog runs." Unwittingly the editors prove the point the author wanted to make. By misreading or failing to correct the fundamental word currit so frequently it grew into a big error. It grew into an even bigger one later because Professor Bobik’s commentary on this text is an explanation based on this faulty text. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Hume Contra Spinoza? Wim Klever In Book 1 ofthe TreatiseofHumanNature1 Spinoza enjoys thehonour ofbeing the only figure from the history of philosophy and science to be explicitly and extensively discussed by Hume. This honour is, however, a dubious one as the treatment he gets is not so friendly. The passage (T 232-51) is full of insults and denunciations: Spinoza is referred to as "that famous atheist" (T 241), and (...) characterized as "universally infamous" (T 240). His doctrine contains "a true atheism" (T 240). His theory about the thinking substance is an "hideous hypothesis" (T 241); Hume does not want to enter "farther into these gloomy and obscure regions" (T 241), although he spends ten pages on the subject. Richard Popkin2 suggests on account ofthis not too well studied section: "In introducing Spinoza into the discussion of the immateriality ofthe soul, Hume follows what was common practice in his day." This statement, if true, raises the question whether Hume was sincere in writing these 'satanicverses'. Does he, after all, hide the backside of his tongue? This would bring him pretty well in line with two of his English forerunners; with Hobbes about whom Aubrey recorded: "He toldme he [Spinoza]had outthrown him [Hobbes] a bar's length, for he [Hobbes] durst not write so boldly," and with Locke, who possessedinhis privatelibraryall Spinoza's worksbutnonetheless, for one reason or another, refused to assess the theories of "those decried names," saying "I am not so well read in Hobbes or Spinoza as to be able to say what were their opinions in this matter" (namely the pre-existence ofthe soul).4 One commentator, named Gilbert Boss, wrote a two volume dissertation in order to argue for the fundamental opposition between the philosophical systems of both thinkers. In this paper I wish to propose another view and to defend their overall agreement. I will not do so with regard to their thought on religion (as this is already done byPopkin), but I shall more specificallyfocuson the theoretical (mainly epistemological) part oftheir work. Coming to Hume's text the reader of Spinoza's work who is, moreover, convinced by his geometrical demonstration of the propositions, does feel himself quite well at home chez Hume. Hume's is not another world for him. Apart from the question who is the real first modern thinker, Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza or Hume, there is much common in their treatises on man and world, not only methodologically. Hume's rejection of "the antient philosophy," in Volume XVI Number 2 89 WIM KLEVER which he criticizes the "fictions... concerning substances, and substantial forms, and accidents, and occult qualities" (T 219), "sympathies, antipathies, and horrors ofa vacuum" (T 224) could have been written by the three other candidates as well. In fact every one of thoseitems maybe tracedoutin Spinoza's work; compare, for instance, JSp 136 ("doctrinam illam puerilem et nugatoriam de formis substantialibus, qualitatibus etc.") or 2 PPC 8s ("Quare omnia ilia figmenta de sympathie et antipathie ut falsa sunt reicienda... Nunquam dicendum erit, quod corpus aliquod movetur, ne detur vacuum; sed tantum ex alterius impulsu"). But let us go to the main theme in Book 1 ofthe Treatise, already present in Part 1, Section 1, "Ofthe Origin ofour Ideas." All our ideas result from impressions, themselves also being ideas or perceptions, though withmoreforce andliveliness. The original perceptions aresaid to be "the causes of our ideas" (T 5). We find the impressions in our mind and their effects, our ideas. Hume does not explain the cognitive status ofthe impressions by reducing them to non-cognitive processes. The "universe of the imagination" (T 68) is a world apart, irreducible to matter; we can't step out ofit, "since nothing is ever present to the mind but perceptions, and since all ideas are deriv'd from something antecedently present to the mind" (T 67). Ideas, whatever their character (about external existences or not), can only be explained by other ideas. Hume carefully avoids the category mistake of transcending the border from mental to material things and keeps consequently, at least methodologically, to the absolute caesura between mind and body. The Spinozistic reader must necessarily feel sympathy for this position. The attributes of... (shrink)

Hiller vonGaertringen says of this inscription: ‘Lapis in obscuro loco collocatus est. In ectypis nihil fere dispeximus … Lectio e Koehlero et Velseno componenda est.’ I did not find the stone till my last morning in Athens: it is E.M. 6600; it is extremely illegible, and I had not time to move it to a really good light. But there are a few things to add, and the length of line can, I believe, be determined.

How should we test theories of reference? The accepted practice is to test them against the referential intuitions of philosophers. Machery et al (2004) wonder why it is appropriate to rely on the intuitions of philosophers rather than those of the folk. I wonder why it is appropriate to rely on referential intuitions at all. We should not go along with the common philosophical view that these intuitions are a priori. Philosophers might follow linguists in thinking that linguistic intuitions are (...) “the voice” of our linguistic competence. But this view is false. Rather than relying solely on the indirect evidence of intuitions, theories of reference need direct evidence from linguistic usage. The paper considers the problems of doing this.Resumo:Como devemos testar teorias de referência? A prática aceita é testá-las diante das intuições de referência dos filósofos. Machery e colegas (2004) se perguntam por que é apropriado confiar nas intuições dos filósofos em vez de naquelas das pessoas comuns. Eu me pergunto por que é apropriado confiar em intuições de referência em absoluto. Não devemos seguir a posição filosófica comum de que essas intuições são a priori. Os filósofos poderiam seguir os linguistas em pensar que as intuições linguísticas são “a voz” da nossa competência linguística. Mas essa posição é falsa. Em vez de confiar exclusivamente na evidência indireta das intuições, as teorias da referência precisam de evidências diretas advindas do uso linguístico. Este trabalho considera os problemas em se fazer isso. (shrink)

Pour comprendre le verset énigmatique de Mc 9,49, «Chacun sera salé au feu», l’auteur adopte, parmi les variantes du texte, la «lectio difficilior»: celle qui ne confond pas l’action du sel avec celle du feu ou réciproquement. Il cherche ensuite des indices originaux de compréhension chez quelques commentateurs faisant autorité. Enfin, il analyse les différents usages du sel auxquels les textes évangéliques font implicitement référence. Il les replace dans le contexte de l’activité artisanale de l’homme Jésus, ainsi que dans (...) la perspective de sa prédication: annonce du Royaume, de sa mort et de sa résurrection. Tout cela permet à l’auteur de retrouver, sous l’expression du «sel au feu», une métaphore, voire une parabole: celle du potier qui asperge de sel dans le feu de son four ses «poteries de terre», afin de les rendre non seulement imputrescibles, mais brillantes et belles. Ainsi agit Dieu Trinité envers les hommes en son oeuvre de résurrection libératrice de tout mal. De cette destinée, découle une éthique pour le présent: chercher la paix. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:American Journal of Philology 124.1 (2003) 137-141 [Access article in PDF] Qvomodo Stemma Gladiatoris Pellicvlae More Philologico Sit Constitvendvm Martin M. Winklersive Martinvs Satiricvs Philocinematographicvs [Figures]Poetae rervmqve scriptores et antiqui et recentiores lectoribus fabulas suas sententiis vel versibus bene textis soliti sunt adferre. Sed hodie novum exstat narrandi genus, quod fabulas hominibus adfert praecipue picturis eo modo compositis et inter se coniunctis ut oculi humani imagines singulares celerrime et (...) sine ulla motus intermissione ipsas moveri percipiant, personarum dialogis et arte musica sonisque diversis comitantibus et iuvantibus. Adeo enim progressa est ars magna lucis et umbrae, quam primum photographiam deinde cinematographiam nominare consuevimus, ut fabulae cuiusvis modi—breves longae, novae antiquae, laetificae tragicae—imitatione veri paene perfecta spectatoribus persuadeant tempora iam praeterita in vitam novam esse recreata.In ipsa arte narrandi non multum interest inter eos qui verbis utuntur, ut poetae ac scriptores, et eos qui imaginibus, ut cinematographi. Praeclare Horatium in arte poetica exponenda dixisse recordemur ut picturam poesin esse. Qua in re Simonidem illum Ceum aliosque poetas Graecos secutus est Flaccus noster. Utroque enim modo, et verbis et picturis, auctores antiqui atque hodierni homines docent delectant movent. 1 Facillime ergo intellegimus fabulam cinematographicam genus quoddam esse textus, sed textus non tantum legendi aut audiendi sed imprimis videndi vel spectandi. Peritissimus quisque talium fabularum [End Page 137] auctor omne tulit punctum, nam miscuit utile dulci. Is quoque non aliter ac poeta antiquus aut prodesse vult aut delectare.Sed editiones nonnullarum fabularum cinematographicarum inter se differunt et lacunas corruptelas vitia alia exhibent. Non enim raro pelliculas adfectas esse constat eius generis damno quod textuum antiquorum docti in editionibus suis obelis indicare solent. Itemque quomodo fabulae cinematographicae originem suam trahant ab antiquioribus quaerere et explicare haud absurdum est. 2Ergo editorum usum secutus his paginis originem pelliculae Gladiatoris anno MM editae exempli gratia stemmate quasi philologico explicabo. Deinde stemmatis sigla brevibus adnotationibus percurram. 3 Hoc modo me demonstraturum spero principia artis philologicae, quae litterarum Graecarum Romanarumque docti adhuc solum soliti sunt textibus adhibere, fabulis quoque cinematographicis magno cum fructu admoveri posse. In stemmate infra dato titulos fabularum cinematographicarum et auctorum eorum nomina Latine reddidi.Ridlius Scotus, pelliculae Gladiatoris auctor, magna cum acclamatione publica, minore criticorum, narrare studet quae imp. Caes. M. Aurelii Commodi Antonini Aug. aetate in imperio Romano gesta sunt. Sed stemmate monstrabo Gladiatorem imprimis ortum esse a nonnullis fabulis cinematographicis prioribus, quibus sons aut insons copiosissime usus sit ille Scotus. Qua de causa pellicula eius nobis indicat quemadmodum res Romanae temporibus nostris undique floreant. Cum ipsa et ceterae huius modi fabulae falsa inventione abundare soleant, tamen rerum et linguarum Romanarum Graecarumque magistri hodie hoc artis popularis genere in scholis saepius niti consueverunt, ut discipulos a falsa ad veram adducant rerum gestarum scientiam et rebus antiquis accuratius instruant. Quibus igitur magistris hoc offero stemma, nam amicus Scotus, sed magis amica veritas. 4 [End Page 138] [Begin Page 140] Conspectvs Siglorvm WPellicularum res antiquas tractantium archetypus, qui est summa rerum Romanarum a scriptoribus antiquis et recentioribus expositarum.AConsensus fabularum quae vel litteris vel ludis scaenicis vel picturis cinematographicis praecipue Italicis Americanisque res Romanas narrant depinguntque.TTriumphus Animi Helena Riefenstahle auctore anno MDCCCCXXXV editus. 5SSpartacus Antonio Viro—nomine suppresso—et Stanlio Cubrico auctoribus anno MDCCCCLX editus.CCasus Imperii Romani Antonio Viro auctore anno MDCCCCLXIIII editus. 6B1-3Triga Georgii Lucae Bella Galactica inscripta et annis MDCCCCLXXVII MDCCCCLXXX MDCCCCLXXXIII primum edita, quae his picturis cinematographicis constat: Pars Quarta: "Spes Nova" (B1), Pars Quinta: "Imperium Referit" (B2), Pars Sexta: "Iedi Reversi" (B3). 7 Editio trigae altera anno MDCCCCLXXXXVII edita itemque Bellorum Galacticorum trigae novae Pars Prima: "Simulacri Minae" anni MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII nihil ad rem.M1-3Triga Georgii Molitoris Maximus Furens inscripta, annis MDCCCCLXXVIIII MDCCCCLXXXI MDCCCCLXXXV edita et his picturis cinematographicis constans: Maximus Furens (M1), Maximi Furentis Pars Altera vel Bellator Peregrinans (M2), Maximus Furens Vltra Tonitrus Tholum (M3). 8GGladiator Ridlio Scoto auctore anno MM editus. 9 [End Page 140]His alias poteram et plures subnectere causas vel philologicas vel cinematographicas. Qui de Scoti Gladiatore plurima cognoscere velint... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Anonymus Defensorium Ockham Ms. Romae, bibl. Angelica 1017 ff. 21r-36r Conspectus siglorum: = addendum censeo [....] = delendum censeo«..» = litterae illegibiles factae sive propter codicis corruptionem deperditae [[..]] = scriptor delevit Y.../ = in margine sive supra lineam inserta (?) = lectio incerta t...-t = corrupta esse videntur I22rl = incipit pagina 22 recto codicis«cCapitulum 15. De novem praedicamentis denominativis> Praedicamenta (adn. in mg.: Capitulo 15) alia (...) a substantia sunt quaedam denominationes substantiae. Denominatur enim substantia a qualitate 'qualis', a quantitate 'quanta', a relatione 'relata', \ab/ actione 'agens', et sic de singulis. Unde sicut conceptus ordinati in praedicamento substantiae sunt univoci, habentes univocam praedicationem de substantia prima, ita conceptus ordinati in praedicamentis accidentalibus sunt conceptus denominativi respectu substantiae, habentes praedicationem denominativam de ipsa—licet possunt esse univoci in suo ordine, et de suis inferioribus univoce praedicari. Est autem (adn. in mg.: Quaestio bona quarta) hic investigandum, utrum secundum multitudinem denominationum de substantia sit multitudo realitatum; ut, sicut sunt denominationes secundum novem genera distinctae, ita res et realitates novem generum distinctae. Quae est utrum novem denominantia substantiam sint dispositiones distinctae realiter a substantia, aut sint 111 Franciscan Studies (54) 1994-1997 112ANONYMUS dispositiones distinctae tantum ratione, sicut Commentator1 innuit. (adn. in ima pag.: Utrum secundum multitudinem denominationum de substantia sit multitudo realitatum, id est utrum novem praedicamenta distinctas habent realitates.) Et ista dubitatio de praedicamentis denominativis consimilis est dubitationi superius2 factae de praedicatis univocis et de correspondentia praedicamentorum et realitatum. Et videtur hie conformiter dicendum sicut de praedictis, scilicet quod multitudo rerum non est secundum multitudinem coneeptuum quiditativorum. Et hoc manifestum est, sumentibus nobis suppositiones has: Primo (adn. in mg.: Prima suppositio) quod substantia habet entitatem propriam. Ex illo sequitur evidenter intentum, nam si praedicamenta denominantia substantiam distinguerentur ab ea realiter, circumscriptis illis realitatibus, nulla remaneret realitas substantiae propria. Si enim substantia materialis haberet [[aliunde figuram puta a qualitate]] aliunde extensionem, puta a quantitate, aliunde figuram, puta a qualitate, aliunde positionem, et ita de alus, istis circumscriptis, quaero quid remaneret pro entitate substantiae? Non apparet quod aliquid, nisi fingas totam realitatem substantiae materialis posse habere esse punctuale et in puncto salvari, quod non capit imaginario. Quia de ratione substantiae materialis et corporeae, quae distinguitur contra immaterialem et incorpoream, est quod habeat partem extra partem.3 Et ita videtur quod substantia materialis erit seipsa quanta, et seipsa terminata, et per consequens seipsa figurata. Seipsa, inquam, et per se, perseitate excludente rem aliam. Secunda suppositio (adn. in mg.: Secunda suppositio) est quod non est contradictio realitatem unam esse, realitate ab ea distincta non existente. Patet, quia non est contradictio nisi affirmetur et negetur idem de eodem,4 implicite vel explicite. Et ista suppositio 1Cf. Averroës In Metaph. V com. 14 (1562) 148EF. 2Cf. supra cap. 11 'De univocis'; cf. cap. 12 (f. 24v): Et manifestum est, quoniam non oportet multitudinem esse in conceptibus, sicut nec multitudo in conceptibus sequitur multitudinem eorum quae sunt in vocibus, necessario sumentibus nobis suppositiones has. 3Cf. Guillelmus de Ockham Summa logicae I c. 44 (OPh I 137): quantitas continua permanens nihil aliud est nisi res una habens partem situaliter distantem a parte. 4Cf. Aristot, De interp. 9, 18a29-30: In his ergo quae sunt et facta sunt necesse est affirmationem vel negationem veram vel falsam esse; Anal. post. 1,11 77a30; Tópica VI,6 143bl6: Nam de omni vel affirmatio vel negatio vera est; Metaph. IV,9 1005bl9- THE DEFENSORIUM OCKHAM1 1 3 concludit similiter intentum. Nam quia contradictio est corpus de genere substantiae (id est substantiam materialem) esse, et non esse quantum (id est non habere partem extra partem); ideo quantitas non est alia res a corpore. Item quia contradictio est magnitudinem esse, et ipsam non esse terminatam et figuratam; ideo figura non est alia res a corpore sive magnitudine. Item quia contradictio est totum esse, et non esse maius parvus distinguerentur specie cum sint plures partes materiae in magno quam in parvo. Solet etiam dici quod magnum et parvum non variant speciem. Istae viae (adn. in mg.: Quod quantitas continua non sit res distincta) non concludunt de quantitate continua, quia non repugnaret sibi unitas; nec ex parte sui, quin scilicet possit habere unitatem formae accidentalis convenientem, nec ex parte subiecti, quin scilicet posset habere subiectum unum. Sed sufficienter videtur convinci quod... (shrink)

L’apprentissage du métier de « maître régent » en théologie passe par le commentaire oral (lectio) des Sentences du Lombard. Cet exercice est confié aux bacheliers: les premiers statuts universitaires ne permettent pas d’en saisir les conditions concrètes et ceux du XIVe siècle laissent soupçonner de grandes contraintes. On peut supposer l’usage d’un certain nombre de « commentaires modèles». Les maîtres ont appliqué des méthodes issues de l’exégèse. Ce sont les manuscrits et leur apparat qui permettent de saisir les (...) modalités de la lectio des Sentences. (shrink)

Présentation de vingt-sept commentaires et monographies qui ont marqué la recherche sur le Psautier durant les années 1995-2000. L'histoire de formes reste le cadre de référence principal, mais les analyses structurelles ont désormais gagné droit de cité. On a vu se multiplier des ouvrages consacrés au "message" de l'ensemble du Psautier et à la composition littéraire de collections particulières. Certains travaux cherchent à mener de front approche synchronique et approche diachronique; d'autres proposent une lectio continua du Psautier, qui tire (...) parti des liens structurels, lexicaux et thématiques entre les psaumes. L'exégèse du livre des psaumes est plus diversifiée aujourd'hui qu'elle ne l'était jusqu'à un passé récent, et tend à redevenir "théologique". (shrink)

The focus on the Logica Nova in the research on 11th and 12th century Quaestio-literature is misleading. It seems to derive from a particular view of the Logica Vetus, which takes Boethius seriously only as a translator and perhaps a commentator of Aristotle. The puzzlement dissappears when Boethius is taken seriously as a logician and dialectician in his own right. Two Boethian works are of particular importance for early medieval as well as for Boethian dialectic, namely the commentary on Cicero's (...) Topica and the De Differentiis Topicis. While all great historians and medieval philosophy acknowledge the early presence and importance of these works, the extent of their influence on the development of the Quaestio has yet to be appreciated. The first section develops the problem by giving an outline of the important features of Bazàn's account of the Quaestio and its place between Lectio and Disputatio. The second section studies Boethius account of dialectic, with particular consideration of teh commentary on Cicero's Topica and the De Differentiis Topicis. The third section argues that Bazàn's and Grabmann's assumption that the 'old logic' did not provide the necessary means for the development of the Quaestio is unjustified. The fourth and final section offers some remarks on the relation of Abelard's Sic et Non to the method of the Quaestio. (shrink)

La lectio divina es un ejercicio ascético y espiritual usado por la comunicad cristiana en las asambleas litúrgicas. Desde los Padres del Desierto su práctica nunca se ha extinguido como ejercicio espiritual. Ahora parece haber vuelto con fuerza como ejercicio de lectura de la Palabra de Dios. La primera parte del artículo recrea los datos históricos fundamentales, la segunda explica su validez para los cristianos y las comunidades de nuestro tiempo.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Beauty, Transcendence, and the Inclusive Hierarchy of Creation1Thomas Joseph White, O.P.Interpreters of Thomas Aquinas have long argued about whether he holds that beauty is a “transcendental,” a feature of reality coextensive with all that exists, like unity, goodness, and truthfulness.2 In the first part of this article, I will argue that Aquinas can [End Page 1215] be read to affirm in an implicit way that beauty is a transcendental. (...) In the second part, I will consider what it might mean from a Thomistic point of view to speak of a transcendent divine beauty, given Aquinas’s metaphysical commitments, particularly with respect to his doctrine of divine simplicity. In the final part, I will treat the question of how the beauty of the creation both manifests and conceals divine beauty.Beauty as a Transcendental Feature of RealityAquinas does not list beauty as a transcendental term in texts on transcendental notions. Perhaps, then, one should simply exclude it from a responsible account of his teaching on this subject. However, at least two well-known texts should give us reason to pause before reaching such a conclusion. One is found in his Commentary on Dionysius’ Divine Names, chapter 4, lectio 5. The other is in his discussion of the beauty of the eternal Son of God in a discussion of the Holy Trinity in the Summa theologiae I, q. 39, a. 8.In the first of these texts, Aquinas is commenting on Dionysius. The extended text is analytically dense. Aquinas is discussing ways in which one might say that God is beautiful and in what ways one might not say so. I will return to his topic below. Here, however, it is pertinent to consider Aquinas’s discussion of the presence of beauty in all that exists. He makes six main points.3 First, all beauty comes [End Page 1216] from God insofar as God is the cause of all that exists. Second, he gives a first definition of beauty: beauty can be defined ontologically as the splendor (claritas) that results from form; everything has a formal determination of some kind insofar as it has existence (esse); therefore, insofar as anything exists (and has some formal ontological content) it has some degree of beauty. Third, the splendor of the form in created things is a participation in the divine splendor from which it originates. The divine nature is the transcendent exemplar of beauty in diverse finite created realities. Fourth, then (and perhaps most importantly), “ex divina pulchritudine esse omnium derivatur”: literally, the existence of everything originates from divine beauty. Fifth, a second definition of beauty is considered: beauty can be defined ontologically as a property of being that emerges from proportion or harmony (consonantia). For example, authentic relationships of personal friendship imply spiritual harmony or concord and are beautiful and noble in this respect. Sixth, then, the concord or beautiful harmonies we find in the created order are expressive of the wisdom of God, who is the author of creation.Evidently, if the existence of everything derives from divine beauty, and if everything that has existence is in some way beautiful by virtue of its intrinsic form, then it would seem to follow logically that beauty, for Aquinas, is a characteristic of being that is coextensive with all that exists. We see a similar idea expressed in the aforementioned passage of ST. Here, however, Aquinas gives a more synthetic definition of beauty in things that combines both the definitions found in our previous discussion, claritas and proportio, but it also adds a third, integritas: ontological integrity or wholeness.Species or beauty has a likeness to the property of the Son. For beauty includes three conditions, “integrity” or “perfection,” [End Page 1217] since those things which are impaired are by the very fact ugly; due “proportion” or “harmony”; and lastly, “brightness” or “clarity,” whence things are called beautiful which have a bright color.4The implication of this point of view is readily apparent. God is essentially beautiful, and God has created all that exists in light of the eternal Word and Wisdom of God, who is the Son. Consequently, all that exists and that... (shrink)

RésuméCet article a été inspiré par l'opposition qui semble exister entre les deux grands courants animant l'œuvre de M. Bachelard.Les auteurs rappellent la différence existant entre une organisation predicative et une organisation dialectique de la connaissance. La connaissance objective est de structure dialectique. Il en résulte que l'évolution de cette connaissance s'accompagne d'un processus obligé de dévalorisation et de revalorisation relative de ses formes antérieures.Ce même processus rend aussi compte des rapports de la pensée poétique et de la pensée objective (...) et scientifique.Dans cette perspective, l'unité d'inspiration de l'œuvre de M. Bachelard est parfaitement évidente. — F. et J.‐P. G. (shrink)