El presente trabajo estudia las dos primeras cuestiones del comentario de Juan Duns Escoto a la Isagoge de Porfirio. En ellas, Escoto establece en primer lugar la cientificidad de la lógica, frente a la objeción aristotélica que ve en la lógica el método de la ciencia. Y, en segundo lugar, frente a la definición aristotélica del objeto de la ciencia como un género determinado, Escoto establece el carácter de la lógica como ciencia común. Se ofrece en anexo la traducción castellana (...) de estas dos cuestiones. (shrink)

In this paper, I examine Scotus’s claim that the categories are the subject of a propter quid science. In order to see the significance of this claim, I first trace the development of the idea that the categories are the subject of a science from Martin of Denmark, Peter of Auvergne, and Simon of Faversham. I then turn toDuns Scotus’s account of the categories as the subject of a propter quid science. Throughout the discussion, I concentrate on the fundamental problems (...) confronting anyone who claims that there is a science of the categories: namely, how they, being ten, can have an appropriate unity. Scotus, as we will see, will answer this problem by claiming that the intellect causes a greater unity in second intentions than the corresponding unity that exists in the world. As a consequence, Scotus contends that the categories are the subject of a propter quid science, one that is radically different from the science of metaphysics. (shrink)