Analiza i Egzystencja


ISSN: 1734-9923     eISSN: 2300-7621    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/aie.2021.54-06
CC BY-SA   Open Access   DOAJ  ERIH PLUS  DOAJ

Lista wydań / 54 (2021)
Natural Reason and God’s Infinite Power: Diversity of Approaches in the Late 13th and 14th Century Commentaries on Averroes’s De substantia orbis

Autorzy: Łukasz Tomanek
Uniwersytet Śląski w Katowicach
Słowa kluczowe: De substantia orbis Averroes Averroism Fernand of Spain Maino de’ Maineri Philosophy in Medieval Paris Philosophy in Medieval Erfurt
Data publikacji całości:2021-07
Liczba stron:35 (181-215)
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:

Abstrakt

The subject of this article is Latin reception of Averroes’s treatise De substantia orbis, with special regard to the commentary practice in the late Middle Ages. Numerous philosophical problems were taken up in these commentaries following Averroes’s lead. The most controver-sial among them were these concerning divine attributes, i.e., infinite power, efficient and final causality, and, consequently, God's ability to create out of nothing. Three different commentaries were therefore chosen to exemplify the key differences be-tween the doctrinal approaches of the commentaries on the De substantia orbis. The first two of them—composed by Fernand of Spain and Maino de’ Maineri—represent the Averroistic approach, adopting and developing Averroes’s ideas; the third commentary—composed by an anonymous author in Erfurt around 1362—represents the non-Averroistic approach referring to the questions raised in the De substantia orbis in order to propose orthodox solutions being far from these adopted in the treaty by Averroes himself. The article aims at scrutinizing the problems of infinite power of God and divine causali-ty as they have been taken up by Latin philosophers from the late XIIIth to the second half of the XIVth century by elucidating the key differences between the two lines of inquiry and highligh-ting the variety of approaches to Averroes’s De substantia orbis.
Pobierz plik

Plik artykułu

Bibliografia

1.Primary Sources:
2.Anonymus Erfordiensis, Commentum in De substantia orbis (Kraków, Biblioteka Uniwersytecka, MS BJ 739, ff. 74ra–116vb).
3.Averroes, Commentum in Metaphys. (ed. Iuntina VIII).
4.Averroes, Commentum in Phys. (ed. Iuntina IV).
5.Averroes, De substantia orbis (ed. Iuntina IX, ff. 3ra–11rb).
6.Fernandus Hispanus, Commentum in De substantia orbis (Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica, Vat. lat. 845, ff. 272ra–307rb).
7.Iohannes de Ianduno, Quaestiones in Physicam (ed. Venezia 1544).
8.Magninus de Maineriis, Quaestiones in De anima III (Bologna, Biblioteca Universitaria, MS 1625, ff. 144ra–167vb).
9.Magninus de Maineriis, Quaestiones in De substantia orbis (Firenze, Biblioteca Nazionale, MS Conv. Soppr. J III 6, ff. 89ra–108va).
10.Magninus de Maineriis, Quaestiones in De substantia orbis, principium (ed. Fioravanti 2016, pp. 216–223).
11.Secondary Sources:
12.Digital Averroes Research Environment. Retrieved from: https://dare.uni-koeln.de/app/ (05.01.2021).
13.Ermatinger (1959). Notes on Some Early Fourteenth Century Scholastic Philosophers. Manuscripta 3(3), 155–168.
14.Ermatinger (1976). Maino de’ Maineri in His Still Unstudied Role as Philosopher in Early 14th-Century Paris. Manuscripta 20(1), 8–9.
15.Etzkorn, G. J. (1981). John Reading on the existence and unicity of God, efficient and final causality. Franciscan Studies, 41(1), 110–221.
16.Fioravanti, G. (2016). Il principium di Maino de’ Maineri alle quaestiones super De substantia orbis. In: A. Rodolfi (ed.), «Ratio practica» e «ratio civilis» Studi di etica e politica medi-evali per Giancarlo Garfagnini (pp. 207–223). Firenze: Edizioni ETS.
17.Galle, G., Guildentops, G. (2004). Ferrandus Hispanus on Ideas. In: G. Van Riel, C. Macé (eds.), Platonic Ideas and Concept Formation in Ancient and Medieval Thought (pp. 51–80). Leuven: Leuven University Press.
18.Hoffmann, R. (2001). Der Metaphysikkommentar des Fernandus Hispanus. Mediaevalia Phil-osophica Polonorum, XXXIV, 95–101.
19.Hyman, A. (1986). Averroes’ De Substantia Orbis. Critical Edition of the Hebrew Text with English Translation and Commentary. Cambridge–Massachusetts–Jerusalem: The Me-dieval Academy of America and the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
20.Jung-Palczewska, E. (1997). A Controversy Concerning Motion and God’s Infinite Power in Thomas Aquinas and Latin Averroism. Studia Mediewistyczne, 32, 47–57.
21.Kuksewicz, Z. (1985a). Johannis de Janduno "De infinitate vigoris Dei". Edition critique. Studia Mediewistyczne, 24, 77–152.
22.Kuksewicz, Z. (1985b). Einführung. In: Theodoricus de Magdeburg, Quaestiones in De sub-stantia orbis (pp. V–XXXIII). Wrocław–Warszawa–Kraków–Gdański–Łódź: Osso-lineum.
23.Kuksewicz, Z. (1986). Un nouveau témoignage de l’averroïsme à Erfurt. Mediaevalia Philo-sophica Polonorum, XXVIII, 27–32.
24.Kuksewicz, Z. (2006). Maino of Milan. A Fourteenth Century Parisian Averroist. Medioevo, 31, 337–375.
25.Kuksewicz, Z. (2007). La découverte d'une école averroïste inconnue: Erfurt. In: J.-B. Brenet (ed.), Averroes et les averroïsmes juif et latin (pp. 299-306). Turnhout: Brepols.
26.Lamy, A. (2012a). La quantité indéterminée de la matière selon Jean de Jandun. Principes et problèmes ontologiques. Revue de métaphysique et de morale, 74(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.3917/rmm.122.0147
27.Lamy, A. (2012b). La théorie averroïste des dimensions indéterminées dans le Traité sur la sub-stance de la sphère céleste (livre I, chapitre 2) de Walter Burley. Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie, 59(1), 26–45.
28.Licata, G. (2019). Problemi della tradizione a stampa del De substantia orbis. Annali della Scuo-la Normale Superiore di Pisa. Classe di Lettere e Filosofia, 11/2, 559–580.
29.Lorenz, S. (1989). Studium Generale Erfordense. Zum Erfurter Schulleben im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert. Stuttgart.
30.Maier, A. (1955). Metaphysische hintergrunde der spatscholstischen Naturphilosophie. Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura.
31.Maurer, A. (1990). John of Jandun and the divine causality. In: A. Maurer, Being and Know-ing. Studies in Thomas Aquinas and Late Medieval Philosophers (pp. 275–308). Toronto: Pontifical Intitute of Mediaeval Studies.
32.Van Steenberghen, F. (1974). Introduction à l'étude de la philosophie médiévale. Recueil offert à l'auteur par ses collègues, ses étudiants et ses amis. Louvain: Publications universi-taires.
33.Vittorini, M. (2011). Il commento di Walter Burley al. De Substantia Orbis: Un’edizione. Meio-evo, 36, 301–385.
34.Weijers, O. (1996). Le travail intellectuel à la Faculté des arts de Paris : textes et maîtres (ca. 1200-1500). 2, Répertoire des noms commençant par C-F. Turnhout: Brepols.
35.Weijers, O. (2003). Le travail intellectuel à la Faculté des arts de Paris: textes et maîtres (ca. 1200-1500). 5, Répertoire des noms commençant par J (suite: á partir de Johannes D.) Turnhout: Brepols.
36.Weisheipl, J. A. (1965). The Principle Omne quod movetur ab alio movetur in Medieval Phys-ics. Isis, 56(1), 26–45.
37.Zimmermann, A. (1968). Ein Averroist des späten 13. Jahrhunderts: Ferrandus de Hispania. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 50(1–2), 145–164.
38.Zimmermann, A. (1994). Remarques et questions relatives à l'oeuvre de Ferrand d'Espagne. In: Diálogo filosófico-religioso entre cristianismo, judaísmo e islamismo durante la edad media en la península iberica: Actes du Colloque international de San Lorenzo de El Es-corial 23–26 juin 1991 (pp. 213–228). Turnhout: Brepols.
39.Zimmermann, I. Β. (1995). Kommentare zu der Schrift des Averroes „De substantia orbis“ in der Bibliotheca Amploniana. In A. Speer (ed.), Die Bibliotheca Amploniana. Ihre Bedeutung im Spannungsfeld von Aristotelismus, Nominalismus und Humanismus (pp. , 122–126). Berlin–Boston: De Gruyter.