A arte Luliana e a recepção medieval dos Tópicos de Aristóteles

José Higuera
{"title":"A arte Luliana e a recepção medieval dos Tópicos de Aristóteles","authors":"José Higuera","doi":"10.21747/21836892/fil35a2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aristotelian opposition between demonstrative and probable arguments is reflected in the medieval commentaries that distinguish between dialectical syllogisms, used by the art of persuasion, and the demonstrative syllogisms based on necessary principles, whose knowledge is immediate and per se notum. In a manuscript of Ars demonstrativa, attributed to ramon Llull, there is a remark about the usage of probable arguments, although they are based on necessary principles. about that, Llull added that naming this work as «demonstrative» might sound slightly «scandalous». However, Llull seems to attest a dilution of the distinction between probable arguments and demonstrative principles, which is possibly related to the Boethian reading of the Topics. Boethius defines a list of differentiae which are the terms that link, in the syllogisms, a premise with a necessary conclusion or a general principle. The medieval commentators of the De Topicisdifferentiis realized that these dialectical places are also applicable to hypothetical syllogisms, which are compounded by conditional premises. Medieval masters made lists of differentiae that include terms such as: opposition, likeness, relation, superior and inferior, authority and trassumptio (the Latin term for metaphor). ramon Llull shows an indirect reception of the De topicis differentiis of Boethius in the figure T of his Ars, as well as a specific application of the argumentative places in the theological dialogue with other religions. Thus, the evidence of the faith articles, although they are “first principles” and true for themselves, is not accessible to the intellect unless it is proved by probable arguments.","PeriodicalId":30039,"journal":{"name":"Historia Revista da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto","volume":"102 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historia Revista da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21747/21836892/fil35a2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aristotelian opposition between demonstrative and probable arguments is reflected in the medieval commentaries that distinguish between dialectical syllogisms, used by the art of persuasion, and the demonstrative syllogisms based on necessary principles, whose knowledge is immediate and per se notum. In a manuscript of Ars demonstrativa, attributed to ramon Llull, there is a remark about the usage of probable arguments, although they are based on necessary principles. about that, Llull added that naming this work as «demonstrative» might sound slightly «scandalous». However, Llull seems to attest a dilution of the distinction between probable arguments and demonstrative principles, which is possibly related to the Boethian reading of the Topics. Boethius defines a list of differentiae which are the terms that link, in the syllogisms, a premise with a necessary conclusion or a general principle. The medieval commentators of the De Topicisdifferentiis realized that these dialectical places are also applicable to hypothetical syllogisms, which are compounded by conditional premises. Medieval masters made lists of differentiae that include terms such as: opposition, likeness, relation, superior and inferior, authority and trassumptio (the Latin term for metaphor). ramon Llull shows an indirect reception of the De topicis differentiis of Boethius in the figure T of his Ars, as well as a specific application of the argumentative places in the theological dialogue with other religions. Thus, the evidence of the faith articles, although they are “first principles” and true for themselves, is not accessible to the intellect unless it is proved by probable arguments.
卢里安艺术与中世纪对亚里士多德主题的接受
亚里士多德在论证和可能论证之间的对立反映在中世纪的评注中,评注区分了辩证法三段论(用于说服的艺术)和基于必要原则的论证三段论(其知识是直接的和自然的)。在一份被认为是拉蒙·鲁的《论证论》手稿中,有一段关于可能论证的使用的评论,尽管它们是基于必要的原则。关于这一点,Llull补充说,将这项工作命名为“示范性”可能听起来有点“可耻”。然而,Llull似乎证明了可能论证和论证原则之间的区别的淡化,这可能与波伊提亚对主题的阅读有关。波伊提乌定义了一系列微分,这些微分是在三段论中,将前提与必然结论或一般原则联系起来的术语。中世纪的“论话题论”的评论者认识到,这些辩证的地方也适用于由条件前提组成的假言三段论。中世纪的大师们列出了一系列的差异,其中包括:对立、相似、关系、优越和低劣、权威和假设(隐喻的拉丁术语)。ramon Llull在他的Ars的图T中显示了对波伊提乌的主题论差异的间接接受,以及在与其他宗教的神学对话中对辩论场所的具体应用。因此,信仰条款的证据,虽然它们是“第一原则”,对自己来说是正确的,但除非通过可能的论证来证明,否则智力是无法获得的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信