[1] In twelve quite demanding chapters, outstanding scholars provide an overall view of the key issues of Scotus’s philosophical thought. To this a very concise introduction is added, concerning the life and works of John Duns (very good, especially the survey of works and the information on critical editions etc.). Throughout the book, I find the information clear and the difficult topics well explained. Moreover, the volume gives a quick entrance to the vast literature. Among the topics discussed are: ‘Metaphysics’ (...) (Peter King), ‘Universals and Individuation’ (Timothy Noone), ‘Modal Theory’ (Calvin Normore), ‘Natural Theology’ (James Ross & Todd Bates), ‘Philosophy of Mind’ (Richard Cross), ‘Cognition’ (Robert Pasnau), ‘Moral Dispositions’ (Bonnie Kent). What strikes the eye is the absence of important theological subjects: Trinity, Christology, sin and grace, to name a few. Since the cover text promises that ‘the essays in this volume systematically survey the full range of Scotus’ thought’, this omission is remarkable. It stems, I guess, from the strict philosophical scope of the series of the Cambridge Companions, but such a limitation should have been recognised explicitly: this companion provides, in fact, an introduction to John Duns’s philosophy—i.e., philosophy in our modern sense. Of course, this separation of philosophical from theological thought is not from Scotus. Most of his innovative ‘philosophical’ ideas are developed in a profoundly theological context! (shrink)

Formats for Reports on Conferences 273 (1) Paris : « Journées d’étude doctorales In utramque partem » (N. Faucher, A. Levilion et M. Roques) 274(2) Göttingen: „Il convivio: Dantes radikaler Neuanfang im Exil. Dante’s Il convivio or How to Restart a Career“ (A.A. Robiglio) 282 (3) Paris : « Thomas d’Aquin et ses sources arabes. Aquinas and the ‘Arabs’ » (F. Romero Carrasquillo) 287 (4) Paris : « Autour du Liber de causis » (M. Meliadò) 293 (5) Bari: “ON WHAT (...) THERE WAS-Conceptions of Being 500-1650” (L. Cesalli and N. Germann) 303 (6) Paris : “Studying Arabic Philosophy: Meaning, Limits and Challenges of a Modern Discipline” (F. Gorgoni) 308 (7) Alcalá de Henares: “La legitimación del poder político en el pensamiento medieval” (P. Roche Arnas y J. Puig Montada) 314 (8) México D.F.: Annual Fall Workshop on Aquinas and the ‘Arabs’ (L.X. López-Farjeat) 325 (9) Trento: «Il desiderio nel Medioevo» (A. Colli) 329 (10) Paris : « Nicolas de Dinkelsbühl et son commentaire des Sentences » (M. Brinzei) 332 (11) Paris : « Théologie et philosophie en prédication : de Thomas d’Aquin à Jean Calvin » (A. Beccarisi) 337 (12) Baltimore, MD: “Secular Masters on Knowledge” (S.M. Metzger) 343. (shrink)

The purpose of this entry is to provide a systematic introduction to medieval views about the nature and ontological status of relations. Given the current state of our knowledge of medieval philosophy, especially with regard to relations, it is not possible to discuss all the nuances of even the best known medieval philosophers' views. In what follows, therefore, we shall restrict our aim to identifying and describing (a) the main types of position that were developed during the Middle Ages, and (...) (b) the most important considerations that shaped their development. We shall have occasion along the way, however, to examine in detail certain aspects of the views of important representatives of all the main medieval positions, including Peter Abelard (1079 1142), Gilbert of Poitiers (1085 1154), Albert the Great, (1200 1280), Thomas Aquinas (1225 1274), John Duns Scotus (1265 1308), Henry Harclay (1270 1317), Peter Auriol (1280 1322), and William Ockham (1285 1347). (shrink)

The work of joachim jungius on the logic of relations was not as original as some authors have thought, But he did make it clear that relational inferences should be distinguished from categorical inferences; and he was the first to recognize the argument 'a rectis ad obliqua', An example of which is 'all circles are figures, Therefore whoever draws a circle draws a figure'.

This study consists in a commentary on some passages from Avicenna, which deal with the category of the relative. The commentary points out the promotion of the relative to the role of an exclusive determining factor. An attempt is made here to show how Avicenna tries to detach the relative accident from its subject, in order to transform it into the exclusive determining factor of a pure thingness. The relative determination of this thingness must be able to receive specifications, which (...) may extend as far as the infimae species. These specifications are obtained by the consideration of the other attributes of the subject of the relative attribution, which are henceforth no more than the “modes of advent” of the relation. (Published Online August 10 2006). (shrink)