{"title":"安瑟伦的apories","authors":"V. N. Olenich","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2020-31-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article deals with the analyse of “Proslogion” of Anselm of Canterbury and examines the apophatic aspects of “unum argumentum”. In the conclusion it shows a number of specific apories that characterize Anselm’s thought. It makes a suggestion about the role of the “fool” from 14th Psalm in the elaboration of this argument.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"44 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anselm’s apories\",\"authors\":\"V. N. Olenich\",\"doi\":\"10.37769/2077-6608-2020-31-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article deals with the analyse of “Proslogion” of Anselm of Canterbury and examines the apophatic aspects of “unum argumentum”. In the conclusion it shows a number of specific apories that characterize Anselm’s thought. It makes a suggestion about the role of the “fool” from 14th Psalm in the elaboration of this argument.\",\"PeriodicalId\":328399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vox. Philosophical journal\",\"volume\":\"44 3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vox. Philosophical journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2020-31-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vox. Philosophical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2020-31-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This article deals with the analyse of “Proslogion” of Anselm of Canterbury and examines the apophatic aspects of “unum argumentum”. In the conclusion it shows a number of specific apories that characterize Anselm’s thought. It makes a suggestion about the role of the “fool” from 14th Psalm in the elaboration of this argument.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
