Switch to: References

Citations of:

William Heytesbury: Medieval Logic and the Rise of Mathematical Physics

Curtis Wilson

British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 8 (31):254-256 (1957)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

The Oxford Calculators in Context.Edith Sylla - 1987 - Science in Context 1 (2):257-279.details The ArgumentOur understanding of the predisposing factors, the nature, and the fate of the Oxford Calculatory tradition can be significantly increased by seeing it in its social and institutional context. For instance, the use of intricate imaginary cases in Calculatory works becomes more understandable if we see the connection of these works to undergraduate logical disputations. Likewise, the demise of the Calculatory tradition is better understood in the light of subsequent efforts at educational reform.Unfortunately, too little evidence remains about the (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 1 citation
Peter of Mantua and the ‘piecemeal’ conception of substantial change.Roberto Zambiasi - forthcoming - British Journal for the History of Philosophy:1-25.details This paper compares the conception of substantial change put forth by Peter of Mantua (d. 1399) in his De primo et ultimo instanti with the one developed by Albert of Saxony (ca. 1320–1390). According to Albert, (i) each substantial form, save for the intellective soul, is a spatially-extended entity with actual quantitative parts that are co-located with the parts of matter they inform, and (ii) these quantitative parts are generated and corrupted one after another over an extended interval of time. (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
The ‘Mysterious’ Thomas Manlevelt and Albert of Saxony.Michael J. Fitzgerald - 2015 - History and Philosophy of Logic 36 (2):129-146.details The essay casts doubt upon the view that Albert was criticizing or was dependent upon Thomas Manlevelt's logico-philosophical views, and counter argues that it is in fact Manlevelt who knows and cites Albert's views in his recently edited Porphyrian Questions, rather than vice versa. The argument for this conclusion proceeds in two stages. First, it is argued that the brief comment Albert makes about ‘conjunct descent’ in treating the definition of merely confused supposition his Perutilis Logica does not conclusively show (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
William of Ockham, the Subalternate Sciences, and Aristotle's Theory of metabasis.Steven J. Livesey - 1985 - British Journal for the History of Science 18 (2):127-145.details Historians of fourteenth-century science have long recognized the extraordinary work at both Oxford and Paris in which natural philosophy was becoming highly mathematical. The movement to subject natural philosophy to a mathematical analysis and to quantify such qualities as heat, color, and of course speed surely stands as one of the most significant aspects of late medieval science. Yet as Edith Sylla has observed, because qualities and quantities pertain to different categories in Aristotelian theory, one might expect Aristotelian theorists to (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 5 citations
William Heytesbury and the Conditions for Knowledge.David B. Martens - 2010 - Theoria 76 (4):355-374.details Ivan Boh affirms and Robert Pasnau denies that William Heytesbury holds merely true belief to be sufficient for knowledge in the broad sense. I argue that Boh is correct and Pasnau is mistaken, and that there is a long-running orthodox medieval tradition agreeing with Heytesbury about the conditions for knowledge. I offer a hypothesis about the origins, continuance and demise of that medieval tradition, and some remarks about the tradition's significance. Download Export citation Bookmark 2 citations

1