两个16世纪科英布拉评论“动物”:佩德罗·达·丰塞卡(attr.)和Cristóvão吉尔。《论灵魂》和《论灵魂的不朽》

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Paula Oliveira e Silva
{"title":"两个16世纪科英布拉评论“动物”:佩德罗·达·丰塞卡(attr.)和Cristóvão吉尔。《论灵魂》和《论灵魂的不朽》","authors":"Paula Oliveira e Silva","doi":"10.21071/refime.v29i2.14318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper analyses the questions on the science of the soul and on the immortality of the soul in two commentaries on Aristotle’s De anima that subsist in the manuscripts of the teaching of philosophy in Coimbra in the sixteenth-century. The paper shows that the positions of the two commentators – Petrus Fonsecae (attr.) and Christophorus Gilli – are in total opposition, concerning either the commentary tradition on Aristotle’s De anima or the theories on the soul they assume. Focused on unpublished and less studied sources this research brings to light some innovative aspects of the teaching of philosophy in Coimbra. We thus suggest that the manuscript sources of the period be reassessed and studied in comparison to the published works.","PeriodicalId":52211,"journal":{"name":"Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two Sixteenth-Century Coimbra Commentaries on 'De anima': Pedro da Fonseca (attr.) and Cristóvão Gil. 'On the Soul' and 'On the Immortality of the Soul'\",\"authors\":\"Paula Oliveira e Silva\",\"doi\":\"10.21071/refime.v29i2.14318\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper analyses the questions on the science of the soul and on the immortality of the soul in two commentaries on Aristotle’s De anima that subsist in the manuscripts of the teaching of philosophy in Coimbra in the sixteenth-century. The paper shows that the positions of the two commentators – Petrus Fonsecae (attr.) and Christophorus Gilli – are in total opposition, concerning either the commentary tradition on Aristotle’s De anima or the theories on the soul they assume. Focused on unpublished and less studied sources this research brings to light some innovative aspects of the teaching of philosophy in Coimbra. We thus suggest that the manuscript sources of the period be reassessed and studied in comparison to the published works.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52211,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21071/refime.v29i2.14318\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21071/refime.v29i2.14318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文分析了存在于16世纪哥印布拉哲学教学手稿中的两篇关于亚里士多德《德阿尼玛》的评论中关于灵魂科学和灵魂不朽的问题。这篇论文表明,无论是关于亚里士多德《动物》的评论传统,还是关于他们所承担的灵魂理论,两位评论家Petrus Fonsecae(attr.)和Christophorus Gilli的立场都是完全对立的。本研究聚焦于未发表和研究较少的资料,揭示了哥印布拉哲学教学的一些创新方面。因此,我们建议对这一时期的手稿来源进行重新评估,并与已出版的作品进行比较研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Two Sixteenth-Century Coimbra Commentaries on 'De anima': Pedro da Fonseca (attr.) and Cristóvão Gil. 'On the Soul' and 'On the Immortality of the Soul'
This paper analyses the questions on the science of the soul and on the immortality of the soul in two commentaries on Aristotle’s De anima that subsist in the manuscripts of the teaching of philosophy in Coimbra in the sixteenth-century. The paper shows that the positions of the two commentators – Petrus Fonsecae (attr.) and Christophorus Gilli – are in total opposition, concerning either the commentary tradition on Aristotle’s De anima or the theories on the soul they assume. Focused on unpublished and less studied sources this research brings to light some innovative aspects of the teaching of philosophy in Coimbra. We thus suggest that the manuscript sources of the period be reassessed and studied in comparison to the published works.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval
Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信