Semantics and OntologyAn Assessment of Medieval Terminism

in Vivarium
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Abstract

This paper aims to assess medieval terminism, particularly supposition theory, in the development of Aristotelian thought in the Latin West. The focus is on what the present author considers the gist of Aristotle’s strategy of argument, to wit conceptual focalization and categorization. This argumentative strategy is more interesting as it can be compared to the modern tool known as ‘scope distinction’.

Semantics and OntologyAn Assessment of Medieval Terminism

in Vivarium

Sections

References

AndrewsR. NewtonL.A. ‘Thomas Maulevelt’s Denial of Substance’ Medieval Commentaries on Aristotle’s Categories 2008 (Leiden 2008 347-368)

BäckA.T. Aristotle’s Theory of Predication 2000 (Philosophia antiqua. A Series of Studies on Ancient Philosophy LXXXIV; Leiden 2000)

BäckA.T. BraakhuisH.A.G.KneepkensC.H. ‘Aquinas on Predication’ Aristotle’s Perihermeneias in the Latin Middle Ages. Essays on the Commentary Tradition 2003 (Artistarium Supplementa X; Groningen-Haren 2003 321-338)

BakkerP.J.J.M. ThijssenJ.H.M.M.ZupkoJ. ‘Aristotelian Metaphysics and Eucharistic Theology: John Buridan and Marsilius of Inghen on the Ontological Status of Accidental Being’ The Metaphysics and Natural Philosophy of John Buridan 2001 (Medieval and Early Modern Science 2; Leiden-Boston 2001 247-264)

BoehnerP. Medieval Logic. An Outline of its Development from 1250 to c. 1400 1952 (Manchester 1952)

HoffmannF. 1988 see Guillelmus de Crathorn

KahnC.H. The Verb ‘Be’ in Ancient Greek 1973 (Foundations of Language. Supplementary Series 16; Dordrecht 1973)

KneepkensC.H. BraakhuisH.A.G.KneepkensC.H. ‘Aristotle’s Transposition and the Twelfth-Century Commentaries on De interpretatione 20 b 1-12. An Exploratory Study’ Aristotle’s Perihermeneias in the Latin Middle Ages. Essays on the Commentary Tradition 2003 (Artistarium Supplementa X; Groningen-Haren 2003 363-411)

LouxM.J. The Possible and the Actual. Readings in the Metaphysics of Modality 1979 (Ithaca and London 1979)

MaritainJ. Eléments de philosophie Fascicule I: L’ordre des concepts. Logique 1930 (Paris 1930)

MoodyE. A. The Logic of William of Ockham 1935 (New York 1935; anastatic repr. 1965)

PinborgJ. ‘Radulphus Brito on Universals’ Cahiers de l’institut du moyen âge grec et latin 1980 35 56 142 1980

RijkL.M. de Logica Modernorum. A Contribution to the History of Early Terminist Logic. 1962-1967 I On the Twelfth Century Theories of Fallacy; II/1: The Origin and the Early Development of the Theory of Supposition II/2: Texts and Indices (Assen 1962-1967)

RijkL.M. de BraakhuisH.A.G.KneepkensC.H.de RijkL.M. ‘Abaelard’s Semantic Views in Light of Later Developments’ English Logic and Semantics from the End of the Twelfth Century to the Time of Ockham and Burleigh. 1981 Acts of the 4th European Symposium on Medieval Logic and Semantics Leiden-Nijmegen 23-27 April 1977 (Artistarium Supplementa I Nijmegen 1981 1-58 [also in E.P. Bos ed. (1989): L.M. de Rijk Through Language to Reality. Studies in Medieval Semantics and Metaphysics (Variorum Reprints; Northampton 1989) (1981)

RijkL.M. de SwiggersP. La philosophie au moyen âge. 1985 (Leiden 1985)

RijkL.M. de ‘Peter Abelard’s Semantics and his Doctrine of Being’ Vivarium 1986a 24 85 127 1986

RijkL.M. de ‘Abelard and Moral Philosophy’ Medioevo 1986b XII 1 27 (1986)

RijkL.M. de BosE.P.MeijerP.A. ‘Causation and Participation in Proclus. The Pivotal Role of Scope Distinction’ On Proclus and his Influence in Medieval Philosophy 1992 (Philosophia Antiqua. A Series of Studies on Ancient Philosophy LIII Leiden 1992 1-34)

RijkL.M. de BosE.P.KropH.A. ‘On Buridan’s View of Accidental Being’ John Buridan: A Master of Arts. Some Aspects of his Philosophy 1993 Acts of the Second Symposium Organized by the Dutch Society for Medieval Philosophy Medium Aevum (Nijmegen 1993 41-51)

RijkL.M. de SpeerAndreas ‘John Buridan on Man’s Capability of Grasping the Truth’ Scientia und Ars im Hoch- und Spätmittelalter 1994 (Miscellanea Mediaevalia 22; Berlin-New York 1994 282-303)

RijkL.M. de de LiberaA.Elamrani-JamalA.GalonnierA. ‘Foi chrétienne et savoir humain. La lutte de Buridan contre les theologizantes’ Langage et philosophie. Hommage à Jean Jolivet 1997 (Etudes de philosophie médiévale 74; Paris 1997 393-409)

RijkL.M. de AngelelliI.Perez-IlzarbeP. Logica Morelli. Some Notes on the Semantics of a Fifteenth Century Spanish Logic’ Medieval and Renaissance Logic in Spain 2000 Acts of the 12th European Symposium on Medieval Logic and Semantics held at the University of Navarra Pamplona 26-30 May 1997 (Philosophische Texte und Studien 54; Hildesheim-Zürich-New York 2000 209-224)

RijkL.M. de 2002 Aristotle. Semantics and Ontology I: General Introduction. The Works on Logic; vol. II: The Metaphysics. Semantics in Aristotle’s Strategy of Argument (Philosophia Antiqua. A Series of Studies on Ancient Philosophy XCI/II; Leiden 2002)

RijkL.M. de Geraldi Odonis Opera Philosophica, II: De intentionibus Critical Edition with a Study on the Medieval Intentionality Debate up to ca. 1350 2005 (Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters LXXXVI; Leiden 2003)

RijkL.M. de Johannes Buridanus, Lectura Erfordiensis in I-VI Metaphysicam together with the 15th-century Abbreviatio Caminensis Introduction Critical Edition and Indexes 2008 (Studia Artistarum. Etudes sur la Faculté des arts dans les Universités médiévales 16; Turnhout 2008)

SpruytJ. Matthew of Orléans Sophistaria sive Summa communium distinctionum circa sophismata accidentium 2001 Edited with an Introduction Notes and Indices (Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters LXXIV; Leiden 2001)

SpruytJ. ‘The Unity of Semantics and Ontology. Wyclif ’s Treatment of the fallacia accidentis’ Vivarium 2008 46 24 58 (2008)

TabarroniA. ‘John Buridan and Marsilius of Inghen on the Meaning of Accidental Terms (Quaestiones super Metaphysicam VIII, 3-5)’ Documenti e Studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 2003 XIV 264 408 (2003)

VendlerZ. Linguistics in Philosophy 1967 (Ithaca N.Y. 1967)

ZupkoJ. AertsenJ.A.SpeerA. ‘Sacred Doctrine, Secular Practice: Theology and Philosophy in the Faculty of Arts in Paris, 1325-1400’ Was is Philosophie im Mittelalter? 1998 (Miscellanea Medievalia 26; Berlin 1998 656-666)

ZupkoJ. ThijssenJ.M.M.H.ZupkoJ. ‘On Certitude’ The Metaphysics and Natural Philosophy of John Buridan 2001 (Medieval and Early Modern Science 2; Leiden-Boston 2001 65-182)

4)

Guthrie (1981) 212 ff.

6)

See De Rijk (2002) I 69-72; 162; 252; II 154; 413.

7)

See De Rijk (2002) II 148-288.

8)

Kahn (1973) 366.

11)

See De Rijk (2002) II 188 ff. and also the sections 1.2 and 2.4.1 below.

13)

For the general theme see Vendler (1967) 131 ff. and De Rijk (1985) 36-47.

15)

For this procedure see De Rijk (2002) I 167-189 and II 34-36.

17)

Cf. De Rijk (2002) I 167-189; II 34-36; 357 ff.; 388 ff.; 406 ff.

20)

Guthrie (1981) 216.

21)

As I have tried to do in De Rijk (2002) by pointing out Aristotle’s skilful use of the four semantic main rules.

22)

Kahn (1973) 232 ff. 403. The ambivalence vs. ambiguity topic is discussed in De Rijk (2002) I 69-72.

23)

Kahn (1973) 461 f.

24)

De Rijk (1992) 1-34.

26)

De Rijk (1992) 1 f.

27)

De Rijk (1992) 16-17.

29)

De Rijk (1992) 26-29.

33)

De Rijk (2002) I 75-255.

34)

De Rijk (2002) I 87-93. One need only consider a purely linguistic feature: the putative copula (our assertoric functor) is said to be ‘adiacens’ as in the Greek texts there is also always talk of passive ‘prostithesthai’ and the like never of the active notion of suntithenai’. In addition the key text in De interpretatione III 16 b 24-25 reads: ‘is is a sign of some combination’ rather than ‘is combines . . .’.

35)

Moody (1935). However Moody is entirely wrong in ascribing the former method to Aristotle.

36)

De Rijk (1981) 48-52; (2000) 215-221; (2002) I 74; II 124; 199; 310; 409.

37)

See De Rijk (2002) I 235-41. As late as in Boethius’s monograph De syllogismis categoricis the author speaks of the verb ‘est’ which is ‘accommodated’ to make up an assertion (as ‘non est’ is added to produce a denial). This manner of expression has nothing to do with the copula idea and comes close to considering the ‘est’ and ‘non est’ assertoric operators to be added to an assertible as is the case in Aristotelian statement-making.

49)

For the general theme see Bakker (2001) 249 ff. and Tabarroni (2003). Buridan’s rephrasing Aristotle’s expression was rightly given special attention by Tabarroni who from the viewpoint of semantics has extensively discussed Buridan’s and Marsilius of Inghen’s comments on Metaphysica VII 3-5. Note that in ipsum and esse ipsum the word ‘ipsum’ is a dummy word used like our ‘x’ ‘y’ etc. just as ‘unumquodque’ (Greek hekaston) is in the Aristotelian formula.

59)

See the extensive discussion in De Rijk (2002) II 244-301.

64)

De Rijk (2005) 251-301; 350.

66)

Spruyt (2008) 24-58. Her discussion of the above type of problematic sentences is found ibid. 32 ff.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 27 27 4
Full Text Views 2 2 2
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0