In R. Salis (ed.), La dottrina dell’analogia dell’essere nella Metafisica di Aristotele e i suoi sviluppi nel pensiero tardo-antico e medievale, Il Poligrafo, Padua, pp. 49-76., 2019
in R. Chiaradonna, F. Forcignanò, and F. Trabattoni (eds.), Ancient Ontologies, Contemporary Debates, «Discipline Filosofiche: Special issue», 28(1): 65-88., 2018
The paper takes issue with Koslicki's Neo-Aristotelian Mereology (NAM) and more particularly with... more The paper takes issue with Koslicki's Neo-Aristotelian Mereology (NAM) and more particularly with her understanding of hylomorphism in mereological terms. NAM centres on two characteristic claims: (i) that Aristotle's form is a proper part of the composite substance; (ii) that there is a univocal notion of part, and a univocal notion of composition, which apply across the board and to matter and form in particular. The paper shows that both assumptions are questionable within an Aristotelian framework. More in general, it is argued that a strictly mereological approach does not do justice to the complex relationship between matter and form, and that considerations about identity are more crucial than mereology when it comes to understanding Aristotle's hylomorphism.
In M. Sialoros (ed.), Revolution and Continuity in Greek Mathematics, De Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 295-318, 2018
Aristotle's contribution to the metaphysics of numbers is often described in terms of a critical ... more Aristotle's contribution to the metaphysics of numbers is often described in terms of a critical response to the Platonist paradigm. Plato, we are told, conceives of numbers as abstract entities entirely distinct from the physical objects around us, while Aristotle takes the more mundane view that numbers are pluralities of physical objects considered in a particular way, a way relevant to mathematics. Without rejecting altogether this familiar picture, this paper aims to show that Aristotle has another major contribution to offer to the history of philosophy of mathematics. In the Metaphysics, he claims that numbers too can be analysed in terms of matter and form (hylomorphism). On the hylomorphic model, a number has both a material component (the units in the number) and a formal one (the structure that keeps the units together). The paper fully explores the motivations behind Aristotle's hylomorphic conceptions of numbers as well as its most significant implications.
in A. Bertolacci and A. Paravicini Bagliani (eds.), La filosofia medievale fra antichità ed età moderna. Saggi in onore di Francesco Del Punta, Edizioni del Galluzzo, Firenze 2017, 37-71., 2017
In R. Salis (ed.), La dottrina dell’analogia dell’essere nella Metafisica di Aristotele e i suoi sviluppi nel pensiero tardo-antico e medievale, Il Poligrafo, Padua, pp. 49-76., 2019
in R. Chiaradonna, F. Forcignanò, and F. Trabattoni (eds.), Ancient Ontologies, Contemporary Debates, «Discipline Filosofiche: Special issue», 28(1): 65-88., 2018
The paper takes issue with Koslicki's Neo-Aristotelian Mereology (NAM) and more particularly with... more The paper takes issue with Koslicki's Neo-Aristotelian Mereology (NAM) and more particularly with her understanding of hylomorphism in mereological terms. NAM centres on two characteristic claims: (i) that Aristotle's form is a proper part of the composite substance; (ii) that there is a univocal notion of part, and a univocal notion of composition, which apply across the board and to matter and form in particular. The paper shows that both assumptions are questionable within an Aristotelian framework. More in general, it is argued that a strictly mereological approach does not do justice to the complex relationship between matter and form, and that considerations about identity are more crucial than mereology when it comes to understanding Aristotle's hylomorphism.
In M. Sialoros (ed.), Revolution and Continuity in Greek Mathematics, De Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 295-318, 2018
Aristotle's contribution to the metaphysics of numbers is often described in terms of a critical ... more Aristotle's contribution to the metaphysics of numbers is often described in terms of a critical response to the Platonist paradigm. Plato, we are told, conceives of numbers as abstract entities entirely distinct from the physical objects around us, while Aristotle takes the more mundane view that numbers are pluralities of physical objects considered in a particular way, a way relevant to mathematics. Without rejecting altogether this familiar picture, this paper aims to show that Aristotle has another major contribution to offer to the history of philosophy of mathematics. In the Metaphysics, he claims that numbers too can be analysed in terms of matter and form (hylomorphism). On the hylomorphic model, a number has both a material component (the units in the number) and a formal one (the structure that keeps the units together). The paper fully explores the motivations behind Aristotle's hylomorphic conceptions of numbers as well as its most significant implications.
in A. Bertolacci and A. Paravicini Bagliani (eds.), La filosofia medievale fra antichità ed età moderna. Saggi in onore di Francesco Del Punta, Edizioni del Galluzzo, Firenze 2017, 37-71., 2017
Uploads
Papers by Gabriele Galluzzo