Disputation and Logic in the Medieval Treatises De Modo Opponendi et Respondendi
In: VivariumSearch for other papers by Paloma Pérez-Ilzarbe in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
In 1980 L. M. de Rijk edited some texts connected with medieval disputation (Die mittelaterlichen Traktate De modo opponendi et respondendi), towards which he showed a strikingly contemptuous attitude. The reason for his contempt was that the treatises did not fit the obligationes and sophismata tradition. In this article I focus on the original version, the Thesaurus Philosophorum, to highlight the distinction of this family of treatises with respect to the “modern” tradition. First, I study the features of the disputation that can be recognised through the collection of fallacious arguments contained in the Thesaurus. Second, I briefly examine the contents of the treatise and their arrangement, showing that they are closely related to the kind of disputation in question. I hope to support the idea that neither the technique of disputation nor the contents and their arrangement deserve a straightforward rejection.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 242 | 40 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 74 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 51 | 1 | 0 |
Disputation and Logic in the Medieval Treatises De Modo Opponendi et Respondendi
In: VivariumSearch for other papers by Paloma Pérez-Ilzarbe in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
In 1980 L. M. de Rijk edited some texts connected with medieval disputation (Die mittelaterlichen Traktate De modo opponendi et respondendi), towards which he showed a strikingly contemptuous attitude. The reason for his contempt was that the treatises did not fit the obligationes and sophismata tradition. In this article I focus on the original version, the Thesaurus Philosophorum, to highlight the distinction of this family of treatises with respect to the “modern” tradition. First, I study the features of the disputation that can be recognised through the collection of fallacious arguments contained in the Thesaurus. Second, I briefly examine the contents of the treatise and their arrangement, showing that they are closely related to the kind of disputation in question. I hope to support the idea that neither the technique of disputation nor the contents and their arrangement deserve a straightforward rejection.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 242 | 40 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 74 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 51 | 1 | 0 |