安东尼奥·帕萨雷兹(1599-1649)论意向认同:对彼得·奥里奥思想的修正

Q4 Arts and Humanities
G. Soliani
{"title":"安东尼奥·帕萨雷兹(1599-1649)论意向认同:对彼得·奥里奥思想的修正","authors":"G. Soliani","doi":"10.34096/petm.v44.n1.11971","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article is aimed to study Antonio Perez’s criticism against Peter Auriol’s theory of intentional identity. Pérez’s theory of cognition is clearly in debt with Auriol’s theory of intentionality. The Spanish Jesuit often uses the same linguistic expressions of Auriol (such as apparent being) and agrees with him about the intentional identity between the cogniser –conciding in act with the act of cognition–, and the cognised object, which is the same thing existing outside the intellect. Both Pérez and Auriol ground their theory of intentional identity on Aristotle’s De anima, but the Spanish Jesuit highlights an inconsistency in Auriol’s doctrine which contradicts what succinctly stated by Aristotle about the identity between the cogniser and the cognised during the act of cognition. By reviewing in-depth Auriol’s theory of intentional identity, conceived as a kind of identity of indistinction, Pérez points out an inconsistency between Auriol’s description of the act of cognition and his conception of the identity of indistinction. Furthermore, Pérez seems to consider insufficient Auriol’s identity of indistinction used to describe the intentional identity characterising the act of cognition. Consequently, he offers a new definition of the identity of indistinction in order to present the apparent being as an undetermined reality which can be determined by any intelligible content. This Perezian review of Auriol’s theory of the apparent being, on the one hand, can be considered as a case of the early modern scholastic revisionism applied to a medieval thinker and, on the other hand, finds a wider application in Pérez’s metaphysics and philosophical anthropology.","PeriodicalId":34178,"journal":{"name":"Patristica et Mediaevalia","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Antonio Pérez (1599-1649) on Intentional Identity: A Revisionism of Peter Auriol’s Thought\",\"authors\":\"G. Soliani\",\"doi\":\"10.34096/petm.v44.n1.11971\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article is aimed to study Antonio Perez’s criticism against Peter Auriol’s theory of intentional identity. Pérez’s theory of cognition is clearly in debt with Auriol’s theory of intentionality. The Spanish Jesuit often uses the same linguistic expressions of Auriol (such as apparent being) and agrees with him about the intentional identity between the cogniser –conciding in act with the act of cognition–, and the cognised object, which is the same thing existing outside the intellect. Both Pérez and Auriol ground their theory of intentional identity on Aristotle’s De anima, but the Spanish Jesuit highlights an inconsistency in Auriol’s doctrine which contradicts what succinctly stated by Aristotle about the identity between the cogniser and the cognised during the act of cognition. By reviewing in-depth Auriol’s theory of intentional identity, conceived as a kind of identity of indistinction, Pérez points out an inconsistency between Auriol’s description of the act of cognition and his conception of the identity of indistinction. Furthermore, Pérez seems to consider insufficient Auriol’s identity of indistinction used to describe the intentional identity characterising the act of cognition. Consequently, he offers a new definition of the identity of indistinction in order to present the apparent being as an undetermined reality which can be determined by any intelligible content. This Perezian review of Auriol’s theory of the apparent being, on the one hand, can be considered as a case of the early modern scholastic revisionism applied to a medieval thinker and, on the other hand, finds a wider application in Pérez’s metaphysics and philosophical anthropology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34178,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patristica et Mediaevalia\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patristica et Mediaevalia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34096/petm.v44.n1.11971\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patristica et Mediaevalia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34096/petm.v44.n1.11971","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在研究安东尼奥·佩雷斯对彼得·奥里奥的意向性同一性理论的批判。p雷斯的认知理论显然与奥里奥的意向性理论有渊源。西班牙的耶稣会士经常使用奥里奥同样的语言表达(如表象存在),并且同意奥里奥关于认知者和被认知对象之间的意向性同一性的观点,前者在行为中与认知行为相一致,后者是存在于智力之外的同一事物。p雷斯和奥里奥都把他们的意向性同一性理论建立在亚里士多德的《论人》的基础上,但西班牙耶稣会士强调了奥里奥学说中的不一致之处,这与亚里士多德关于认知行为中认知者和被认知者之间的同一性的简洁陈述相矛盾。通过深入回顾奥里奥的意向性同一性理论,指出奥里奥对认知行为的描述与他的意向性同一性概念不一致。此外,psamurez似乎认为不足以用Auriol的模糊同一性来描述表征认知行为的意向同一性。因此,他提出了一个新的定义的身份的不区分,以呈现作为一个未确定的现实,显然存在可以由任何可理解的内容确定。佩雷兹对奥里奥的表面存在理论的回顾,一方面可以被认为是早期现代经院修正主义应用于中世纪思想家的一个例子,另一方面,在佩雷兹的形而上学和哲学人类学中找到了更广泛的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Antonio Pérez (1599-1649) on Intentional Identity: A Revisionism of Peter Auriol’s Thought
This article is aimed to study Antonio Perez’s criticism against Peter Auriol’s theory of intentional identity. Pérez’s theory of cognition is clearly in debt with Auriol’s theory of intentionality. The Spanish Jesuit often uses the same linguistic expressions of Auriol (such as apparent being) and agrees with him about the intentional identity between the cogniser –conciding in act with the act of cognition–, and the cognised object, which is the same thing existing outside the intellect. Both Pérez and Auriol ground their theory of intentional identity on Aristotle’s De anima, but the Spanish Jesuit highlights an inconsistency in Auriol’s doctrine which contradicts what succinctly stated by Aristotle about the identity between the cogniser and the cognised during the act of cognition. By reviewing in-depth Auriol’s theory of intentional identity, conceived as a kind of identity of indistinction, Pérez points out an inconsistency between Auriol’s description of the act of cognition and his conception of the identity of indistinction. Furthermore, Pérez seems to consider insufficient Auriol’s identity of indistinction used to describe the intentional identity characterising the act of cognition. Consequently, he offers a new definition of the identity of indistinction in order to present the apparent being as an undetermined reality which can be determined by any intelligible content. This Perezian review of Auriol’s theory of the apparent being, on the one hand, can be considered as a case of the early modern scholastic revisionism applied to a medieval thinker and, on the other hand, finds a wider application in Pérez’s metaphysics and philosophical anthropology.
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
Patristica et Mediaevalia
Patristica et Mediaevalia Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
15 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:481959085
Book学术官方微信