This article examines the late-medieval plague tractate by Augustine of Trento, an Augustinian friar who addressed the matter of plague before the Black Death of 1347/1348. I will investigate Augustine’s astrological approach to the prognostication, prevention, and cure of the plague epidemic. Further, I will compare his work to the Compendium medicinalis astrologiae, composed by the Dominican Niccolò de Paganica in 1330, and to the consilia produced by the master of medicine Gentile da Foligno in 1348. This double comparison will (...) help to better understand the shared intellectual milieu and the different approaches of these three authors. (shrink)

During the Middle Ages, physicians, philosophers, and theologians developed a complex and rich discourse on the concept of sickness. Illness (infirmitas) was perceived as the natural state of existential imperfection for homo viator, fallen due to sin and impaired in his bodily integrity. Leprosy, smallpox, plague and the other collective diseases that constantly plagued medieval societies prompted reflections on etiology and modes of transmission of epidemics. Building on Galenic teachings, medieval medicine – both Arabic and Latin – delved into the (...) study of fevers. Key concepts in medical pathology, such as the humors, humidum radicale, and spiritus, were assimilated and reinterpreted within philosophical and theological frameworks. The ten contribution collected in this volume explore this rich array of concepts and themes by closely examining the theories and works of prominent and lesser-known figures in medicine, theology, and philosophy active across Latin Christendom, the Islamic context, and the Jewish world: from Augustine to ʿAlī ibn al-ʿAbbas al-Maǧūsī, from Avicenna to Constantine the African, from Maimonides to Albert the Great, from Arnau de Vilanova to Gentile da Foligno, from Henry of Herford to Michele Savonarola. (shrink)

The claim defended in the paper is that the mechanistic account of explanation can easily embrace idealization in big-scale brain simulations, and that only causally relevant detail should be present in explanatory models. The claim is illustrated with two methodologically different models: Blue Brain, used for particular simulations of the cortical column in hybrid models, and Eliasmith’s SPAUN model that is both biologically realistic and able to explain eight different tasks. By drawing on the mechanistic theory of computational explanation, I (...) argue that large-scale simulations require that the explanandum phenomenon is identified; otherwise, the explanatory value of such explanations is difficult to establish, and testing the model empirically by comparing its behavior with the explanandum remains practically impossible. The completeness of the explanation, and hence of the explanatory value of the explanatory model, is to be assessed vis-à-vis the explanandum phenomenon, which is not to be conflated with raw observational data and may be idealized. I argue that idealizations, which include building models of a single phenomenon displayed by multi-functional mechanisms, lumping together multiple factors in a single causal variable, simplifying the causal structure of the mechanisms, and multi-model integration, are indispensable for complex systems such as brains; otherwise, the model may be as complex as the explanandum phenomenon, which would make it prone to so-called Bonini paradox. I conclude by enumerating dimensions of empirical validation of explanatory models according to new mechanism, which are given in a form of a “checklist” for a modeler. (shrink)

Although arguments for and against competing theories of vagueness often appeal to claims about the use of vague predicates by ordinary speakers, such claims are rarely tested. An exception is Bonini et al. (1999), who report empirical results on the use of vague predicates by Italian speakers, and take the results to count in favor of epistemicism. Yet several methodological difficulties mar their experiments; we outline these problems and devise revised experiments that do not show the same results. We (...) then describe three additional empirical studies that investigate further claims in the literature on vagueness: the hypothesis that speakers confuse ‘P’ with ‘definitely P’, the relative persuasiveness of different formulations of the inductive premise of the Sorites, and the interaction of vague predicates with three different forms of negation. (shrink)