This paper investigates a series of Oxford Obligationes texts, all of which can be associated with Richard Billingham. My study is based on eleven of the surviving manuscripts and two early printed texts. I focus on one aspect of their discussion, namely the rule for granting the initial positum of an obligational disputation of the type called positio, and the six restrictions that could be placed on that rule. I explain these restrictions with reference to several sophismata that were meant to illustrate the problems that the restrictions were intended to solve, and in particular, I discuss the fifth restriction ‘not inconsistent with the positum’. I also shed light on the final restriction, which has not always been well understood, namely the restriction ‘wherever there is no obligatio relevant to the positum’.
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
L.M. de Rijk, ‘Richard Billingham’s Works on Logic’, Vivarium 14 (1976), 121-38: 132 notes that the Obligationes are preceded by the colophon: “Expliciunt supposiciones et consequencie barlingam. Incipiunt obligaciones.”
Albertus de Saxonia, Perutilis Logica (Venice, 1522: reprint Hildesheim-New York, 1974), f. 49rb; Albert von Sachsen, Logik, ed. and trans. H. Berger (Hamburg, 2010), 1242-6.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 231 | 40 | 2 |
Full Text Views | 174 | 0 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 33 | 2 | 0 |
This paper investigates a series of Oxford Obligationes texts, all of which can be associated with Richard Billingham. My study is based on eleven of the surviving manuscripts and two early printed texts. I focus on one aspect of their discussion, namely the rule for granting the initial positum of an obligational disputation of the type called positio, and the six restrictions that could be placed on that rule. I explain these restrictions with reference to several sophismata that were meant to illustrate the problems that the restrictions were intended to solve, and in particular, I discuss the fifth restriction ‘not inconsistent with the positum’. I also shed light on the final restriction, which has not always been well understood, namely the restriction ‘wherever there is no obligatio relevant to the positum’.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 231 | 40 | 2 |
Full Text Views | 174 | 0 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 33 | 2 | 0 |