- Università degli Studi "Gabriele d'Annunzio" di Chieti-Pescara
Dipartimento di Studi Socio-Economici, Gestionali e Statistici
Via dei Vestini, 31
66100 CHIETI CH
ITALY
- History of University Philosophy, History of Universities, Second Scholasticism, History of Medieval Philosophy, History of Renaissance Philosophy, History of early modern philosophy, and 13 moreMedieval Philosophy, Renaissance Philosophy, Scholastic Philosophy, Early Modern Philosophy, History of Metaphysics, History of Epistemology, University Philosophy, History of Philosophical Historiography, Philosophical Historiography, Jesuitica, Francisco Suárez, Digital Humanities, and History of Philosophyedit
- Marco Forlivesi (1967-) is Professor of History of Philosophy at the University of Chieti-Pescara (Università degli S... moreMarco Forlivesi (1967-) is Professor of History of Philosophy at the University of Chieti-Pescara (Università degli Studi 'Gabriele d'Annunzio' di Chieti e Pescara). His studies span the period from the 13th to the 17th century, principally focusing on the History of University Philosophy, both in the context of public 'studia' and in the context of the 'studia' of religious orders. He has published three major books and a number of articles in Italian, English and French. He is also the editor of ten collective volumes and of two web sites. He is a member of several scholarly societies and research teams.edit
DArIL è un sistema finalizzato a rendere fruibili online, secondo una pluralità definita di modalità, i testi delle lezioni inaugurali prodotte nell'ambito delle università e dei collegi in età di antico regime. La sua base dati è... more
DArIL è un sistema finalizzato a rendere fruibili online, secondo una pluralità definita di modalità, i testi delle lezioni inaugurali prodotte nell'ambito delle università e dei collegi in età di antico regime. La sua base dati è costituita da fotoriproduzioni digitali e trascrizioni semi-diplomatiche di documenti stilati in un arco temporale che va dal Rinascimento ai primi anni del XIX secolo. Il documento descrive le regole di acquisizione delle fotoriproduzioni dei documenti che si desidera rendere accessibili tramite DArIL, le regole di denominazione dei file destinati a contenere le informazioni che costituiscono la base dati dell'archivio elettronico, le regole di edizione dei testi e le regole di costruzione dell'apparato elettronico, ossia le regole di codifica di quei fenomeni strutturali, semantici e critici che vengono messi a disposizione dell'utilizzatore dell'archivio.
Research Interests:
Dagli anni a cavallo tra XII e XIII secolo, quando i pensatori latini incontrarono le opere fisiche e metafisiche di Aristotele, all’ultimo quarto del XVII, quando la “pars valentior” degli autori europei volse le spalle ad alcune delle... more
Dagli anni a cavallo tra XII e XIII secolo, quando i pensatori latini incontrarono le opere fisiche e metafisiche di Aristotele, all’ultimo quarto del XVII, quando la “pars valentior” degli autori europei volse le spalle ad alcune delle tesi fondamentali della fisica dello Stagirita, le università pubbliche e gli “studia” degli ordini religiosi furono teatro di una rigogliosa fioritura speculativa. Di questo lungo periodo di tempo, i secoli XIII e XIV sono consueto oggetto di studio da parte degli storici della filosofia medievale; al contrario, l’età che si estende dal XV al XVII secolo è un territorio ancora poco esplorato. In questi secoli, nell’ambito delle università e degli “studia” in genere un dichiarato tradizionalismo fu tutt’uno con una costante genesi di nuove idee; una moltitudine di scrittori fu protagonista di un impetuoso confronto tra le differenti anime della classicità e del medioevo; i primi risultati del pensiero scientifico moderno vi germogliarono o furono avversati; molti degli elementi fondamentali del pensiero moderno ebberò là i loro natali. Di questa fertile età dai molti nomi – il più celebre e infelice dei quali è certamente “seconda scolastica” – si occupa il presente volume, offrendo al lettore una presentazione del pensiero sviluppatosi in essa e dei legami che lo congiunsero alle altre componenti della cultura europea del tempo.
Research Interests:
Among the 17th-century promoters of Scotism, Bartolomeo Mastri (1602-1673) was conspicuous for the breadth of his work, his knowledge of the authors and debates of his time, and in particular for his refined interpretations of the... more
Among the 17th-century promoters of Scotism, Bartolomeo Mastri (1602-1673) was conspicuous for the breadth of his work, his knowledge of the authors and debates of his time, and in particular for his refined interpretations of the philosophy and theology of John Duns Scotus. These qualities have made him an important, though not always explicitly declared, point of reference for more than a few modern readers of Scotus’ doctrines, and they make him a precious source for understanding 17th-century academic thought. This monograph traces the history of Mastri’s training, his teaching, and the reasons, sources, structure, and purposes of his individual works. It also reveals the background to the controversies which he took part in and the history of his posthumous fortune. This essay does not directly address philosophical issues, yet it lays the groundwork for a correct interpretation of them. Among the results of this research, the following can be listed by way of an example. First, it has been proved that Mastri’s philosophical course was already published and circulated in the 1640s. Therefore, it is no longer correct to place and study this thinker among the academic authors of the last quarter of the 17th century, as has been done (actually, these are authors whose speculative traits are appreciably different from those of the authors of the first half of the 17th century). Second, a strong link has been demonstrated to exist between the policy and the educational structures of the religious orders in the age of the Counter Reformation on one hand, and, on the other, the rise and decline of the literary genre of the philosophical and theological cursus between the end of the 16th and the second half of the 17th century. Third, an introductory analysis has been provided of the different attitudes which, during the 17th century, the followers of some medieval authors took towards the works of their masters.
Research Interests:
This essay examines the doctrines concerning the different kinds of interactions between cognition and affection that were formulated by the Iberian Dominican Thomist João Poinsot (1589-1644) between 1630 and 1644. The Iberian thinker was... more
This essay examines the doctrines concerning the different kinds of interactions between cognition and affection that were formulated by the Iberian Dominican Thomist João Poinsot (1589-1644) between 1630 and 1644. The Iberian thinker was only partially aware of the debates that agitated the academic world during the second quarter of the 17th century; nonetheless, his positions are interesting and complex. Poinsot’s thought is enhanced – without him being aware of it, apparently – by several Nominalistic and Scotistic contributions. His doctrine concerning the nature of signs is a good example of a combination of elements from different origins. In it, one can find the theories regarding signs which were developed by the Nominalists, the theories on the nature of relation which were held by the “orthodox” Thomistic school, and the theories which were developed by Scotus on the type of relation that exists between knowledge and the known object. Finally, all of this is maintained within the framework of a Cajetanist conception of the cognitive process. Equally interesting is the Poinsotian doctrine of the relationship between the appetitive faculties and their objects. Poinsot believes that this relationship is specifically different from that which exists between the cognitive faculties and their objects; nevertheless – indeed, because of this – he thinks that affectivity is an essential and specific mode of access to the world. An enquiry into the characteristics of the presence of the object to affectivity, and inside affectivity, leads our author to elucidate further the nature of the properly cognitive information that the subject is able to gain from such a presence and to explain the fact that objects of ordinary experience are qualified by affective connotations. In particular, the fact that the object of knowledge is usually affectively connoted - but we could also say “affectively collocated” - is explained by Poinsot by using the mind’s power to connect in an implicit judgement both the characteristics of the object grasped by knowledge and the affective states that those known characteristics generate.
Research Interests:
I contributi raccolti nel presente volume si confrontano con i temi della riflessione teorica e storica di Roberto Garaventa, per molti anni docente di storia della filosofia presso l'Università di Chieti-Pescara. Sono oggetto di... more
I contributi raccolti nel presente volume si confrontano con i temi della riflessione teorica e storica di Roberto Garaventa, per molti anni docente di storia della filosofia presso l'Università di Chieti-Pescara. Sono oggetto di particolare attenzione le questioni della finitudine e della caducità umane e quella, strettamente connessa alle precedenti, della libertà religiosa e della sua comunicazione.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Gregorio Piaia si è formato presso l'Università di Padova, dove si laureò il 17 febbraio 1968 con una tesi coordinata da Carlo Giacon sul tema dell'averroismo politico nel pensiero di Marsilio da Padova. Tra i suoi maestri è da ricordare... more
Gregorio Piaia si è formato presso l'Università di Padova, dove si laureò il 17 febbraio 1968 con una tesi coordinata da Carlo Giacon sul tema dell'averroismo politico nel pensiero di Marsilio da Padova. Tra i suoi maestri è da ricordare ancora Giovanni Santinello, del quale fu il principale collaboratore nel guidare il gruppo di lavoro formato da giovani studiosi impegnati nel progetto di una grande Storia delle storie generali della filosofia, uscita in prima edizione in lingua italiana tra il 1979 e il 2004 ed ora in corso di traduzione e aggiornamento in lingua inglese. La vita "pubblica" di Piaia si è svolta essenzialmente nella sua funzione di professore universitario, all'inizio come docente in formazione presso l'università di Padova, poi quale professore associato presso l'Università di Verona, infine dal 1987 di nuovo a Padova, dove in qualità di professore ordinario tenne per quasi trent'anni la cattedra di storia della filosofia. Padova, Verona, il Veneto: certamente questi sono stati i riferimenti territoriali entro i quali si è compiuta la carriera accademica del bellunese Piaia. Ma egli estese ben presto l'ambito della sua attività di docente oltre questi limiti geografici, in Europa e nelle Americhe. Lo stesso spirito di apertura ha animato l'attività scientifica di Gregorio Piaia, che non si è svolta in limiti territoriali o di scuola precisi ma all'interno di una vasta "repubblica delle lettere" dai contorni più internazionali che nazionali: ne è testimonianza il suo ruolo di direttore o redattore di importanti riviste e la sua presenza nelle più rilevanti società di promozione degli studi filosofici e storico-filosofici. Non meno degna di nota, infine, è la sua costante attenzione e disponibilità nei confronti dei giovani studiosi. Il presente volume intende essere modesto segno della stima di cui gode e dell'ampiezza dei suoi interessi di ricerca.
Research Interests:
The philosophy and theology of the Valencian Jesuit Benet Perera (Pererius) offer an outstanding point of view that enables scholars not only to examine some of the most relevant discussions faced and nourished by the Society of Jesus in... more
The philosophy and theology of the Valencian Jesuit Benet Perera (Pererius) offer an outstanding point of view that enables scholars not only to examine some of the most relevant discussions faced and nourished by the Society of Jesus in the first decades of its life, but also to disclose the role played by Jesuit authors in the history of Early Modern thought.
During his many years of teaching at the Collegio Romano, Perera treated a number of controversial topics and discussions, such as the debates on a correct philosophical educational methodology, on the nature of metaphysics and of “scientia de anima”, on the epistemological role of mathematics and on the principles of biblical exegesis. A number of his theses circulated widely and were fiercely debated both within the Society of Jesus and in the European scholarly milieu. His daring usage of non-Christian sources (particularly Averroes), for example, was strongly opposed in Jesuit Colleges both in Italy and Germany. While his clear distinction between the realms of ontology and rational theology generated a steadfast opposition among the Lutherans, it was appreciated by the Calvinists; by contrast, his psychology was appreciated by both Lutherans and Calvinists.
This thematic volume aims to provide an introduction to Benet Perera’s philosophy, focusing in particular on the epistemological aspects that constitute the core of his thought.
During his many years of teaching at the Collegio Romano, Perera treated a number of controversial topics and discussions, such as the debates on a correct philosophical educational methodology, on the nature of metaphysics and of “scientia de anima”, on the epistemological role of mathematics and on the principles of biblical exegesis. A number of his theses circulated widely and were fiercely debated both within the Society of Jesus and in the European scholarly milieu. His daring usage of non-Christian sources (particularly Averroes), for example, was strongly opposed in Jesuit Colleges both in Italy and Germany. While his clear distinction between the realms of ontology and rational theology generated a steadfast opposition among the Lutherans, it was appreciated by the Calvinists; by contrast, his psychology was appreciated by both Lutherans and Calvinists.
This thematic volume aims to provide an introduction to Benet Perera’s philosophy, focusing in particular on the epistemological aspects that constitute the core of his thought.
Research Interests:
Tracing the history of the doctrines on the nature of faith is an immense endeavour. What the Middle Ages and the Renaissance felt on this subject resulted in a huge literary production, involving an extensive number of authors and taking... more
Tracing the history of the doctrines on the nature of faith is an immense endeavour. What the Middle Ages and the Renaissance felt on this subject resulted in a huge literary production, involving an extensive number of authors and taking a variety of themes into account. Compared to this vast literature, the contributions constituting the present volume have a limited and defined scope: they aim to analyse 12th- to 16th-century doctrines specifically concerned with faith as a theological virtue. In this perspective, a number of recurrent problems of exegetical, theological, pastoral, or political nature have been identified. Among the most significant challenges faced by medieval and Renaissance authors, one can notice the attempt to hold together two key-features defining faith: on the one hand, the gnoseological "weakness" of faith, which is considered an assent, maybe a sort of obscure understanding, yet not a sight, either of God or of anything else; on the other hand, the absolute "certitude" and "truth" of faith, which were the matter of no controversy. These features gave rise to a crucial gnoseological problem, that is to say, how a person adhering to the allegedly true and undeniable faith can really know that his/her faith is not a mere opinion. Another exemplary case concerns the reasoning on faith’s political and ecclesiological dimension. In this respect, faith is not seen primarily as an intellectual attitude, but rather as a sort of theological-anthropological prerequisite, generating, when present, a person’s belonging (or, when absent, a person’s not belonging) to the political community of believers. Precisely the political dimension of faith makes the problem of infidelitas so immediate and momentous for many medieval and Renaissance authors, and elicits the will to reduce the extent of infidelitas and the number of infideles thanks to a widespread work of predication, persuasion and repression. Facing problems like the ones now recalled, medieval and Renaissance authors, in a supreme effort to solve them, begot the kaleidoscopic variety of differing theories that is the subject of the present publication and that – paradoxically as it may seem – paved the way for medieval, Renaissance and modern discourses on relativism and toleration.
The volume contains contributions by Paolo Bettiolo, Magdalena Bieniak, Christopher Burger, Charles M.A. Caspers, Mark J. Clark, Marcia L. Colish, Carlo Delcorno, William Duba, Michael Embach, Matthew Gaetano, Christophe Grellard, Fortunato Iozzelli, Tiziano Lorenzin, Fabrizio Mandreoli, Thomas Marschler, Constant J. Mews, Hideki Nakamura, Richard G. Newhauser, Antonino Poppi, Riccardo Saccenti, Silvia Serventi and Francesco Siri.
The volume contains contributions by Paolo Bettiolo, Magdalena Bieniak, Christopher Burger, Charles M.A. Caspers, Mark J. Clark, Marcia L. Colish, Carlo Delcorno, William Duba, Michael Embach, Matthew Gaetano, Christophe Grellard, Fortunato Iozzelli, Tiziano Lorenzin, Fabrizio Mandreoli, Thomas Marschler, Constant J. Mews, Hideki Nakamura, Richard G. Newhauser, Antonino Poppi, Riccardo Saccenti, Silvia Serventi and Francesco Siri.
Research Interests:
During the 20th century, several accurate historical reconstructions of the thought of authors such as Francisco Suárez and the Protestant thinkers were formulated; nonetheless, the representations of the history of metaphysics that have... more
During the 20th century, several accurate historical reconstructions of the thought of authors such as Francisco Suárez and the Protestant thinkers were formulated; nonetheless, the representations of the history of metaphysics that have enjoyed most success were those proposed by Martin Heidegger and Étienne Gilson. The former formulated the theory that, since the Middle Ages at least, the history of metaphysics was characterized by the unification into a single science of the study of being as being (ontology) and the study of the first being (rational theology). Heidegger judged this unification to be unwarranted and historically fatal, and – redefining a term coined by Kant – he named the resulting discipline (which was for him aberrant) “ontotheology”. Gilson was responsible for the theory that the deutero¬scholastic authors (and specifically Suárez) developed an ontology which was “pure”, i.e. independent of existence; an independence that Gilson judged to be nefarious. The readings of the history of philosophy proposed by these two authors have given rise to a substantial amount of research. Although within the framework of the above interpretation, this research and the printed studies resulting from it have expanded the range of texts considered worthy of analysis, have redrawn, recombined and corroded the “historiographical” paradigms from which they derived and, above all, have kept alive the interest in the issue of the development of the conceptions of the nature of metaphysics. Nevertheless, it is doubtful whether the paradigms put forward by Heidegger and Gilson are valid keys for access to historical reality. The essentially theoretical nature of these paradigms, the paucity of their textual and documentary basis, and their inability to account for an increasing number of texts and data suggest that they have to be considered more as samples of the philosophy of history than as reconstructions of a section of the history of philosophy. The wish not to be confined to a historiography ruled by theoretical intent and focused on few predetermined thinkers led to devote this issue of ‘Medioevo’ to the history of the doctrines on the subject/object of metaphysics in the period from the Later Middle Ages to the Early Modern Age. This issue makes available to the scholarly community researches on thinkers and themes previously scarcely explored; we hope that it can bring to light the historical significance of authors and debates that were until now considered as “minor” and contribute to a more accurate, and therefore a more interesting, representation of the history of metaphysics.
Marco Forlivesi, Presentazione, p. 7 – Marco Forlivesi, Approaching the Debate on the Subject of Metaphysics from the Later Middle Ages to the Early Modern Age: The Ancient and Medieval Antecedents, p. 9 – Claus A. Andersen, «Metaphysica secundum ethymon nominis dicitur scientia transcendens». On the Etymology of ‘metaphysica’ in the Scotist Tradition, p. 61 – Antonino Poppi, L’oggetto della metafisica nella “Quaestio de subiecto metaphysicae” di Giacomino Malafossa (1553), p. 105 – Isabelle Mandrella, Le sujet de la métaphysique et sa relation au conceptus entis transcendentissimi aux 16ème et 17ème siecles, p. 123 – Pier Paolo Ruffinengo, L’oggetto della metafisica nella scuola tomista tra tardo medioevo ed età moderna, p. 141 – Maria Muccillo, Un dibattito sui libri metafisici di Aristotele fra platonici, aristotelici e telesiani (con qualche complicazione ermetica): Patrizi, Angelucci e Muti sul soggetto della metafisica, p. 221 – Riccardo Pozzo, Cornelius Martini sull’oggetto della metafisica, p. 305 – Marco Lamanna, «De eo enim Metaphysicus agit logice». Un confronto tra Pererius e Goclenius, p. 315 – Massimiliano Savini, Una metafi sicasotto tutela: “gnostologia”, “noologia” e “ontologia” nel pensiero di Abraham Calov, p. 361 – Marco Sgarbi, «Unus, verus, bonus et Calovius». L’oggetto della metafisica secondo Abraham Calov, p. 381 – Sven K. Knebel, “Metaphysikkritik”? Historisches zur Abgrenzung von Logik und Metaphysik, p. 399 – Claus A. Andersen, The “Quaestio de subiecto metaphysicae” by Giacomino Malafossa from Barge (ca1481-1563). Edition of the Text, p. 427 – Daniel Heider, The Unity of Suarez’s Metaphysics, p. 475 – Francesco Piro, Lo scolastico che faceva un partito a se (“faisait band a part”). Leibniz su Durando di San Porziano e la disputa sui futuri contingenti, p. 507 – Abstracts, p. 545 – Indice dei nomi, p. 551.
Marco Forlivesi, Presentazione, p. 7 – Marco Forlivesi, Approaching the Debate on the Subject of Metaphysics from the Later Middle Ages to the Early Modern Age: The Ancient and Medieval Antecedents, p. 9 – Claus A. Andersen, «Metaphysica secundum ethymon nominis dicitur scientia transcendens». On the Etymology of ‘metaphysica’ in the Scotist Tradition, p. 61 – Antonino Poppi, L’oggetto della metafisica nella “Quaestio de subiecto metaphysicae” di Giacomino Malafossa (1553), p. 105 – Isabelle Mandrella, Le sujet de la métaphysique et sa relation au conceptus entis transcendentissimi aux 16ème et 17ème siecles, p. 123 – Pier Paolo Ruffinengo, L’oggetto della metafisica nella scuola tomista tra tardo medioevo ed età moderna, p. 141 – Maria Muccillo, Un dibattito sui libri metafisici di Aristotele fra platonici, aristotelici e telesiani (con qualche complicazione ermetica): Patrizi, Angelucci e Muti sul soggetto della metafisica, p. 221 – Riccardo Pozzo, Cornelius Martini sull’oggetto della metafisica, p. 305 – Marco Lamanna, «De eo enim Metaphysicus agit logice». Un confronto tra Pererius e Goclenius, p. 315 – Massimiliano Savini, Una metafi sicasotto tutela: “gnostologia”, “noologia” e “ontologia” nel pensiero di Abraham Calov, p. 361 – Marco Sgarbi, «Unus, verus, bonus et Calovius». L’oggetto della metafisica secondo Abraham Calov, p. 381 – Sven K. Knebel, “Metaphysikkritik”? Historisches zur Abgrenzung von Logik und Metaphysik, p. 399 – Claus A. Andersen, The “Quaestio de subiecto metaphysicae” by Giacomino Malafossa from Barge (ca1481-1563). Edition of the Text, p. 427 – Daniel Heider, The Unity of Suarez’s Metaphysics, p. 475 – Francesco Piro, Lo scolastico che faceva un partito a se (“faisait band a part”). Leibniz su Durando di San Porziano e la disputa sui futuri contingenti, p. 507 – Abstracts, p. 545 – Indice dei nomi, p. 551.
Research Interests: Metaphysics, Epistemology, Medieval Philosophy, Renaissance Philosophy, Second Scholasticism, and 8 moreEarly Modern Philosophy, History of early modern philosophy, History of Renaissance Philosophy, History of University Philosophy, History of Metaphysics, History of Epistemology, History of Medieval Philosophy, and History of Philosophy
Antonio Bernardi was a leading figure of the multifaceted community of the Renaissance Aristotelian humanists. Having entered the court of Pope Paul III Farnese, he enjoyed substantial freedom of expression, which he used to full effect... more
Antonio Bernardi was a leading figure of the multifaceted community of the Renaissance Aristotelian humanists. Having entered the court of Pope Paul III Farnese, he enjoyed substantial freedom of expression, which he used to full effect in expounding publicly his distinctive interpretations of Aristotle’s texts. Although he was the first Italian writer to mention Peter Ramus, he tenaciously advocated the excellence of Aristotelian doctrines, though rejecting at the same time the entire history of the interpretation of the Stagirite’s thought.
Marco Forlivesi, Introduzione, p. VII - Bruno Andreolli, Un filosofo per la corte. Antonio Bernardi tra i Pico e i Farnese, p. 1 - Graziella Martinelli Braglia, L’erudito e l’ecclesiastico. I ritratti di Antonio Bernardi, p. 13 - Cesare Vasoli, Filosofia, logica, dialettica e retorica nel VII degli “Eversionis singularis certaminis libri” di Antonio Bernardi, p. 25 - Maria Muccillo, La tesi “vere aristotelica” di Antonio Bernardi sul libro delle “Categorie” di Aristotele e la sua fortuna nella tradizione antiperipatetica rinascimentale, p. 45 - Antonino Poppi, Antonio Bernardi e la Scuola filosofica padovana del Cinquecento, p. 85 - Annarita Angelini, “Dialecticae praestantia et divisio”. Achille Bocchi, ad Antonio Bernardi, illustrissimo filosofo, p. 115 - Cristóvão Marinheiro, L’ordre des sciences théoriques dans l’“Eversio” de Bernardi et sa réception dans l’aristotélisme ibérique, p. 141 - Marco Cavina, “Res diversae diversos habeant ordines”. Aristotelismo e duello: Antonio Bernardi nelle diatribe di metà Cinquecento, p. 153 - Umberto Casari, Antonio Bernardi nel giudizio storiografico di Girolamo Tiraboschi, p. 169 - Marco Forlivesi e Cristóvão Marinheiro, Appendice: elementi di biografia e bibliografia, p. 183 - Indice dei nomi di persona, p. 195.
Marco Forlivesi, Introduzione, p. VII - Bruno Andreolli, Un filosofo per la corte. Antonio Bernardi tra i Pico e i Farnese, p. 1 - Graziella Martinelli Braglia, L’erudito e l’ecclesiastico. I ritratti di Antonio Bernardi, p. 13 - Cesare Vasoli, Filosofia, logica, dialettica e retorica nel VII degli “Eversionis singularis certaminis libri” di Antonio Bernardi, p. 25 - Maria Muccillo, La tesi “vere aristotelica” di Antonio Bernardi sul libro delle “Categorie” di Aristotele e la sua fortuna nella tradizione antiperipatetica rinascimentale, p. 45 - Antonino Poppi, Antonio Bernardi e la Scuola filosofica padovana del Cinquecento, p. 85 - Annarita Angelini, “Dialecticae praestantia et divisio”. Achille Bocchi, ad Antonio Bernardi, illustrissimo filosofo, p. 115 - Cristóvão Marinheiro, L’ordre des sciences théoriques dans l’“Eversio” de Bernardi et sa réception dans l’aristotélisme ibérique, p. 141 - Marco Cavina, “Res diversae diversos habeant ordines”. Aristotelismo e duello: Antonio Bernardi nelle diatribe di metà Cinquecento, p. 153 - Umberto Casari, Antonio Bernardi nel giudizio storiografico di Girolamo Tiraboschi, p. 169 - Marco Forlivesi e Cristóvão Marinheiro, Appendice: elementi di biografia e bibliografia, p. 183 - Indice dei nomi di persona, p. 195.
Research Interests:
In the first half of the 17th century an exuberant philosophical thought developed in the European universities and in the “studia” of religious orders. Having matured during four centuries of debate among the heirs of the medieval and... more
In the first half of the 17th century an exuberant philosophical thought developed in the European universities and in the “studia” of religious orders. Having matured during four centuries of debate among the heirs of the medieval and classical philosophical traditions, animated by a galaxy of innovative thinkers, and stirred by the results of early-modern scientific thought, the academic philosophy of the period provides modern authors with the threads to weave their own philosophical systems, without however exhausting in this its potential. Among the 17th-century promoters of Scotism, Bartolomeo Mastri was conspicuous for the breadth of his work, his knowledge of the debates of his time, and for his refined interpretations of the doctrines of Scotus. These qualities have made him a point of reference for more than a few modern readers of Scotus’ doctrines and a precious source for an understanding of 17th-century academic thought. In 2002, to celebrate the 4th centenary of his birth, an international conference was held in Meldola, Mastri’s native town (near Forlì). This volume presents the results of the meeting, in a series of papers exploring his philosophical thought.
Marco Forlivesi, A Man, an Age, a Book, p. 23 - Alessandro Ghisalberti, Mastri e la storia della filosofia medievale, p. 145 - Gregorio Piaia, Mastri e la storia della filosofia moderna, p. 151 - Matteo Veronesi, Il Dottore Ubertoso: Mastri e la dimensione letteraria dei discorsi filosofici, p. 165 - Francesco Bottin, Bartolomeo Mastri: dalla “subtilitas” scotiana all’ermeneutica “generalis”, p. 189 - Paola Müller, La dottrina delle “fallaciæ in dictione” nelle “Disputationes in Organum” di Bartolomeo Mastri e Bonaventura Belluto, p. 205 - Paul Richard Blum, Astrazione per indifferenza: Bartolomeo Mastri all’inizio della metafisica moderna, p. 223 - Lukáš Novák, Scoti de conceptu entis doctrina a Mastrio retractata et contra Poncium propugnata, p. 237 - Marco Forlivesi, The Nature of Transcendental Being and Its Contraction to Its Inferiors in the Thought of Mastri and Belluto, p. 261 - Piero Di Vona, La “disputatio de natura entis” nel “cursus” filosofico di Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 339 - Luigi Iammarrone, Necessità e contingenza in Bartolomeo Mastri e in alcuni rappresentanti dell’esistenzialismo contemporaneo, p. 347 - Ulrich G. Leinsle, Schwester „formalitas“ oder Bruder „modus“? Mastri im Streit um modale Entitäten, p. 363 - Michael Renemann, Mastri on “præcisio obiectiva”, p. 399 - Sven K. Knebel, What about Aureol? Mastri’s Contribution to the Theory of the Distinction of Reason, p. 415 - John P. Doyle, Mastri and Some Jesuits on Possible and Impossible Objects of God’s Knowledge and Power, p. 439 - Jacob Schmutz, Bartolomeo Mastri et la mouche, 469 - Fabio Gambetti, Il trattato “De Deo” nelle “Disputationes theologicæ” di Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 521 - Jean-Pascal Anfray, Prescience divine, décrets concomitants et liberté humaine d’après Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 555 - Riccardo Quinto, Bartolomeo Mastri e la teologia, p. 593 - Bernardino da Armellada, Grazia santificante e accettazione divina secondo Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 621 - Antonino Poppi, Libertà e moralità nell’opera di Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 643 - Santo Burgio, Il probabilismo moderato nella “Theologia moralis” (1671) di Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 685 - Alessandro Ghisalberti, Il “Compendium Theologiæ moralis Bartolomæi Mastrii” di Giacomo Garzi, p. 701 – Appendici, p. 721 - Indice dei nomi di persona, p. 739.
Marco Forlivesi, A Man, an Age, a Book, p. 23 - Alessandro Ghisalberti, Mastri e la storia della filosofia medievale, p. 145 - Gregorio Piaia, Mastri e la storia della filosofia moderna, p. 151 - Matteo Veronesi, Il Dottore Ubertoso: Mastri e la dimensione letteraria dei discorsi filosofici, p. 165 - Francesco Bottin, Bartolomeo Mastri: dalla “subtilitas” scotiana all’ermeneutica “generalis”, p. 189 - Paola Müller, La dottrina delle “fallaciæ in dictione” nelle “Disputationes in Organum” di Bartolomeo Mastri e Bonaventura Belluto, p. 205 - Paul Richard Blum, Astrazione per indifferenza: Bartolomeo Mastri all’inizio della metafisica moderna, p. 223 - Lukáš Novák, Scoti de conceptu entis doctrina a Mastrio retractata et contra Poncium propugnata, p. 237 - Marco Forlivesi, The Nature of Transcendental Being and Its Contraction to Its Inferiors in the Thought of Mastri and Belluto, p. 261 - Piero Di Vona, La “disputatio de natura entis” nel “cursus” filosofico di Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 339 - Luigi Iammarrone, Necessità e contingenza in Bartolomeo Mastri e in alcuni rappresentanti dell’esistenzialismo contemporaneo, p. 347 - Ulrich G. Leinsle, Schwester „formalitas“ oder Bruder „modus“? Mastri im Streit um modale Entitäten, p. 363 - Michael Renemann, Mastri on “præcisio obiectiva”, p. 399 - Sven K. Knebel, What about Aureol? Mastri’s Contribution to the Theory of the Distinction of Reason, p. 415 - John P. Doyle, Mastri and Some Jesuits on Possible and Impossible Objects of God’s Knowledge and Power, p. 439 - Jacob Schmutz, Bartolomeo Mastri et la mouche, 469 - Fabio Gambetti, Il trattato “De Deo” nelle “Disputationes theologicæ” di Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 521 - Jean-Pascal Anfray, Prescience divine, décrets concomitants et liberté humaine d’après Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 555 - Riccardo Quinto, Bartolomeo Mastri e la teologia, p. 593 - Bernardino da Armellada, Grazia santificante e accettazione divina secondo Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 621 - Antonino Poppi, Libertà e moralità nell’opera di Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 643 - Santo Burgio, Il probabilismo moderato nella “Theologia moralis” (1671) di Bartolomeo Mastri, p. 685 - Alessandro Ghisalberti, Il “Compendium Theologiæ moralis Bartolomæi Mastrii” di Giacomo Garzi, p. 701 – Appendici, p. 721 - Indice dei nomi di persona, p. 739.
Research Interests:
This book aims to substantiate, through a series of essays on specific topics, the historiographical hypothesis according to which in the philosophical thought developed from the 13th to the 17th century not only discontinuities occur,... more
This book aims to substantiate, through a series of essays on specific topics, the historiographical hypothesis according to which in the philosophical thought developed from the 13th to the 17th century not only discontinuities occur, but also unity. This does not mean rejecting the traditional division of the history of philosophy in medieval, Renaissance and modern philosophy. Rather, it means to maintain that the canonical partition is not the only possible representation of the history of philosophy that unfolds during the aforementioned centuries. The essays in this volume, beyond the specific issues they consider, converge in highlighting precisely the following point: focusing the attention on the connections between the philosophical doctrines developed during those centuries can be historiographically profitable as much as drawing boundaries between them.
Alessandro Ghisalberi, Prefazione, p. 9 – Andrea A. Robiglio, La nozione di “velleitas” in Tommaso d’Aquino, p. 15 – Antonio Petagine, L’intelletto e il corpo: il confronto tra Tommaso d’Aquino e Sigieri di Brabante, p. 76 – Alessandro Ghisalberti, Fine ultimo e conoscenza intellettiva: una questione della scuola averroista bolognese del sec. XIV, p. 120 – Paola Müller, Le “fallaciae in dictione” in Guglielmo di Ockham, p. 143 – Marco Laffranchi, L’interpretazione “retorica” del linguaggio dei trascendentali in Lorenzo Valla, p. 167 – Paola Negro, Intorno alle fonti scolastiche di Hugo Grotius, p. 200 – Marco Forlivesi, Materiali per una descrizione della disputa e dell’esame di laurea in età moderna, p. 252.
Alessandro Ghisalberi, Prefazione, p. 9 – Andrea A. Robiglio, La nozione di “velleitas” in Tommaso d’Aquino, p. 15 – Antonio Petagine, L’intelletto e il corpo: il confronto tra Tommaso d’Aquino e Sigieri di Brabante, p. 76 – Alessandro Ghisalberti, Fine ultimo e conoscenza intellettiva: una questione della scuola averroista bolognese del sec. XIV, p. 120 – Paola Müller, Le “fallaciae in dictione” in Guglielmo di Ockham, p. 143 – Marco Laffranchi, L’interpretazione “retorica” del linguaggio dei trascendentali in Lorenzo Valla, p. 167 – Paola Negro, Intorno alle fonti scolastiche di Hugo Grotius, p. 200 – Marco Forlivesi, Materiali per una descrizione della disputa e dell’esame di laurea in età moderna, p. 252.
Research Interests:
Jacopo Mazzoni's "De triplici hominum vita" (1576, re-issued in 1577) is a work highly representative of the cultural atmosphere of the late Renaissance. It is an ambitious text of 5197 'conclusiones' comprising knowledge of the liberal... more
Jacopo Mazzoni's "De triplici hominum vita" (1576, re-issued in 1577) is a work highly representative of the cultural atmosphere of the late Renaissance. It is an ambitious text of 5197 'conclusiones' comprising knowledge of the liberal arts, philosophy and theology that Mazzoni originally intended to discuss publicly in Rome in 1576, and did so in Bologna in 1577. The present study focuses on the Platonic sources used by Mazzoni in the sections concerning the nature of the heavens and the nature of the soul: two topics intensely debated in the second half of the sixteenth century. A historically significant example of Mazzoni's erudition and critical thought is the way in which he belies Copernicus by questioning the meaning of those 'auctoritates' (Plato and the Pythagoreans) with which the Copernicans sought to substantiate their theory. Indeed, his stance on this point, which does not seem to have been the subject of any study until now, is important for evaluating the reception of Copernicanism in Italy.
Research Interests:
The present study stems from two observations. The first is that the notion of ‘scholasticism’ in general, the notion of ‘scholastic theology’ and the notion of ‘scholastic philosophy’ have had discrete historical developments. The second... more
The present study stems from two observations. The first is that the notion of ‘scholasticism’ in general, the notion of ‘scholastic theology’ and the notion of ‘scholastic philosophy’ have had discrete historical developments. The second that there is a lack of research focusing specifically on the history of the notion of ‘scholastic philosophy’. Aiming to overcome this lacuna, the essay presents a concise history of the development of the notion of ‘scholastic philosophy’. The survey has led to two findings. On the historical level, evidence is provided that the notion of ‘scholastic philosophy’ is a late Renaissance or early modern creation and is imbued with substantial ideological elements. On the historiographical level, attention is drawn to its inadequacy as an effective description of any aspect of medieval or early Renaissance thought.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
During the century following the Council of Trent, a gradual development of two trends within Catholic religious orders became evident: the first consisted in unifying and strengthening the Order’s culture by focussing on one author of... more
During the century following the Council of Trent, a gradual development of two trends within Catholic religious orders became evident: the first consisted in unifying and strengthening the Order’s culture by focussing on one author of reference; the other in elaborating a new way of presenting that author’s doctrines. In the case of the Friars Minor Conventuals, these trends were fostered and codified in the second decade of the seventeenth century by the minister general of the Order, Giacomo Montanari from Bagnacavallo. Through his work and directives, he promoted the idea that a specific kind of intellectual activity was a prime way to lead an authentic religious life and, at the same time, he established the limitations within which it should be carried out. This activity consisted in providing the Order with new works featuring innovative didactic characteristics and a renewed defence of the doctrines of John Duns Scotus; its limitations consisted in the obligation to root firmly any philosophical and theological speculation in the thought of the medieval master. Bartolomeo Mastri and Bonaventura Belluto’s philosophy cursus ad mentem Scoti was probably the major result of this impetus. The following essay examines the ways in which this process occurred and the outcomes to which it led.
Research Interests: History of Universities, Second Scholasticism, History of early modern philosophy, History of Renaissance Philosophy, History of University Philosophy, and 5 moreHistory of theology, History of Philosophy, History of Renaissance Theology, History of Early-Modern Theology, and History of University Theology
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The essay traces the history of the debate on the nature of metaphysics and its object from Late Antiquity to the 14th century in the frame of the history of the debate on the nature of the subject/object of science. As a consequence it... more
The essay traces the history of the debate on the nature of metaphysics and its object from Late Antiquity to the 14th century in the frame of the history of the debate on the nature of the subject/object of science. As a consequence it identifies five elements constituting the question of the nature of metaphysics: the epistemological role of the subject/object of science; the degree of insight of metaphysics into that which it considers; the role assigned to God and separate substances within metaphysics; the relationship between metaphysics, or rational theology, and revealed theology; and the different conceptions that authors develop of the notion of being. The positions of a number of authors from Antiquity to the Later Middle Ages concerning this themes are examined here and their historical relationships investigated. As for Thomas Aquinas, for instance, I argue that he does not consider the ens commune, which is the subject of metaphysics, as conceptually identical with transcendental being. For him, transcendental being includes all its inferiors; by contrast, common being includes some inferiors of being (general rationes; rationes of immaterial substances as far as the latter are taken as principles of being), but not all of them (particular rationes of material beings; rationes of immaterial substances different from those which characterize these substances when the latter are taken as principles of being). Thus, in Aquinas’s view, transcendental being is an ontological/metaphysical notion; common being is an epistemological notion. In reality they are identical, but before the mind they are not completely identical. Furthermore, one can notice that the Italian Dominican maintains that God is both cause of the subject of metaphysics and part of it. Ens commune, taken as it is in reality, is identical with transcendental being; hence, on the one hand, it is common both to material substances and to spiritual substances and, on the other, it is in a way posterior to the latter substances, since it depends upon them.
Research Interests:
This essay examines the positions of Scotus and a number of Scotists on the nature of metaphysics and its object. According to the mature Scotus, metaphysics is possible as a science distinct both from physics and from revealed theology... more
This essay examines the positions of Scotus and a number of Scotists on the nature of metaphysics and its object. According to the mature Scotus, metaphysics is possible as a science distinct both from physics and from revealed theology thanks to a capability and a limitation. The capability is expressed by Scotus in two ways. Firstly: the ratio of being that is included in everything can be abstracted from it; in particular, this ratio can be abstracted from sensible things. Secondly: in reality, metaphysics is a “transcendentology”, which deals both with absolute transcendentals (first of all with the ratio of being) and with disjunctive ones (moreover, considering separately each of their two parts). In particular, metaphysics has to deal with the proper characteristics of the two parts of the disjunctive transcendental “infinite being / finite being”. The limitation posed by Scotus is twofold. First of all, in the present state the human intellect (and, as a consequence, human metaphysics) cannot grasp the proper characteristics of the infinite being. Secondly, in any case the couple “immobile being / mobile being” is not a disjunctive transcendental, so that metaphysics cannot study the proper characteristics of the immobile being. Thanks to these tenets, Scotus advocates a conception of metaphysics as a unitary science dealing both with rationes generalissimae, and – but only to some extent – spiritual substances, nevertheless he binds together these two parts of this science in a way which is intrinsically complex and (due to the fact that one of his works, the De cognitione Dei, failed to circulate) not even fully known by his followers. In this essay I argue that Scotus’ followers solved the “open problems” posed by the theory and the texts of their master by developing divergent strategies. Francis of Marchia and Bonet removed all sorts of asymmetry inside metaphysics between the study of material substances and the study of spiritual substances, but separated the science of transcendental rationes from the science of spiritual beings. By contrast, Andrés, Zerbi and Trombetta combined into a single science the science of tran¬scendental rationes and the science of spiritual beings, but emphasized that metaphysics deals with spiritual substances more in detail than it does with the material ones. In particular, the position of the Scotist Trombetta diverges from the position of his ideal master on an essential point. According to Scotus, the distinction between metaphysics and physics lies in the simple and immediate abstractability of being from what is sensible. This abstractibility is such that the comprehension of being, considered as a unitary and intelligible ratio, does not change during the entire development of metaphysics. By contrast, for Trombetta, the distinction between metaphysics and physics lies in the cognizance that spiritual beings can occur. This cognizance is the result of the demonstration of the existence of spiritual beings.
Research Interests:
The neo-Thomist and the Heideggerian interpretations of Suárez’s thesis on the object and nature of metaphysics are still effective obstacles to the comprehension of the course of philosophical thought between Middle Ages and Modern Age.... more
The neo-Thomist and the Heideggerian interpretations of Suárez’s thesis on the object and nature of metaphysics are still effective obstacles to the comprehension of the course of philosophical thought between Middle Ages and Modern Age. Unlike what was maintained by thinkers as Gilson and Heidegger, Suárez expounded clearly and firmly a concept of metaphysics according to which this discipline is indissolubly constituted both by the enquiry into transcendental being and the enquiry into spiritual being. Moreover, he neither conceived of the object of this science as a mere conceptual content, nor treated it as fully equivalent with the transcendental being. This inhibits us from understanding Suarezian metaphysics as ontology – let alone as pure ontology – and prevents us from considering Suárez as the precursor of the ontologies which were developed in Protestant regions during the 17th century.
Research Interests:
This essay is devoted to the position of Francisco Suárez on the nature of metaphysics and the object of this science. It first of all maintains that the Gilsonian and Heideggerian interpretation of Suárez’s doctrine prevents the... more
This essay is devoted to the position of Francisco Suárez on the nature of metaphysics and the object of this science. It first of all maintains that the Gilsonian and Heideggerian interpretation of Suárez’s doctrine prevents the possibility of understanding both the position of the Jesuit authors, and the history of the conceptions of metaphysics from the Later Middle Ages to the Early Modern Age. In particular, the pedestrian use of categories such as “ontology” and “ontotheology” leads to a misunderstanding not only of Suárez’s position, but also of the specificity of the path followed by contemporary and later academic thinkers in the Protestant area. Far from advocating a conception of metaphysics as “pure ontology”, Suárez constantly and consciously tried to develop a concept of metaphysics as a unified science. His “anti-ontological” conception of metaphysics is distinguished by two fundamental theses and two theses connected to the fundamental ones. The first fundamental thesis: as concerns the depth of the investigation conducted by metaphysics into spiritual substances and material substances, this science proceeds asymmetrically. This thesis is connected to the following: metaphysics is not a science concerned only with transcendental rationes; in fact, it provides a knowledge deeper than that constituted by the attribution of transcendental rationes to a certain number of subjects. The second fundamental thesis: comprehending the subject of metaphysics involves the acknowledgement of the existence of spiritual beings. This thesis is connected to the following: metaphysics, to some extent, demonstrates the existence of its object. All this prevents us from interpreting Suarez’s metaphysics as an ontology or, even less, a “pure” ontology. If someone is not willing to abandon the inadequate term “ontology”, my proposal is to broaden its meaning by means of a label like “impure”, to express the fact that the relationships of metaphysics with material being and spiritual being are - according to Suárez - asymmetrical and that the object of that science precisely summarizes and expresses those relationships and the binding links that found them.
Research Interests:
The “anti-ontological” conception of metaphysics developed by Suárez is distinguished by two fundamental theses and two complementary theses connected to the fundamental ones. First fundamental thesis: as concerns the depth of the... more
The “anti-ontological” conception of metaphysics developed by Suárez is distinguished by two fundamental theses and two complementary theses connected to the fundamental ones. First fundamental thesis: as concerns the depth of the investigation conducted by metaphysics about spiritual substances and material substances, this science proceeds asymmetrically. This thesis is connected to the following one: metaphysics is not a science concerned only with transcendental rationes; in fact, it provides a knowledge deeper than that constituted by the attribution of transcendental rationes to a certain number of subjects. Second fundamental thesis: comprehending the subject of metaphysics involves the acknowledgement of the existence of spiritual beings. This thesis is connected to the following one: metaphysics, to some extent, demonstrates the existence of its object. The sources from which Suárez may have drawn inspiration for his position are at least five. As to the first fundamental thesis and the thesis connected to it, the source of the Jesuit thinker is probably Thomas Aquinas. As to the second fundamental thesis, a source of Suárez’s position might be Alexander of Alessandria (also known as Alexander Bonensis and Alessandro Bonino). As to the thesis connected to the second fundamental one, Suárez might have drawn inspiration from Hervaeus Natalis (Nédellec) and Nicolaus de Orbellis (also known as Nicolaus Dorbellis, Nicolaus de Dorbellis, Nicholas of Orvaux and Nicolas de Orvaux). Lastly, as regards at least the two fundamental theses and the first secondary thesis, the nearest and probable source of Suárez’s thought is Antonio Trombetta.
Research Interests: Metaphysics, Medieval Philosophy, Renaissance Philosophy, Second Scholasticism, Francisco Suárez, and 7 moreEarly Modern Philosophy, History of early modern philosophy, History of Renaissance Philosophy, History of University Philosophy, History of Metaphysics, History of Medieval Philosophy, and History of Philosophy
Research Interests: Metaphysics, Medieval Philosophy, Renaissance Philosophy, Second Scholasticism, Early Modern Philosophy, and 6 moreHistory of early modern philosophy, History of Renaissance Philosophy, History of University Philosophy, History of Metaphysics, History of Medieval Philosophy, and History of Philosophy
Filippo Fabri coinceived himself as a follower of Scotus promoting the latter's positions in the contemporary milieu. He advocated a conception of metaphysics built on five pillars: transcendental being is a 'formalitas'; transcendental... more
Filippo Fabri coinceived himself as a follower of Scotus promoting the latter's positions in the contemporary milieu. He advocated a conception of metaphysics built on five pillars: transcendental being is a 'formalitas'; transcendental being is the subject of metaphysics; transcendental being virtually contains everything that metaphysics deals with; possible theoretical sciences are four, but only three of them are viable for human beings; metaphysics does not absorb the remaining theoretical sciences. Fabri's position appears simple, yet it hides a number of critical issues; examining them allows us to qualify the variant of Scotism supported by Fabri as a strongly realist one and suggests the reasons why other Scotists propounded different readings of the position of Scotus.
Research Interests:
This essay examines the criticisms which Filippo Fabri aimed at some doctrines advocated, respectively, by Francesco Patrizi, Francisco Suárez and Galileo Galilei. Fabri (1564-1630) was a member of the Order of Friars Minor Conventual and... more
This essay examines the criticisms which Filippo Fabri aimed at some doctrines advocated, respectively, by Francesco Patrizi, Francisco Suárez and Galileo Galilei. Fabri (1564-1630) was a member of the Order of Friars Minor Conventual and taught metaphysics 'in via Scoti' (1603-1606) and theology 'in via Scoti' (1606-1630) at the 'Universitas Artistarum' of the Padua Studium. Against Patrizi (and Gianfrancesco Pico), Fabri maintained the soundness of Aristotle’s thought and works; against Suárez, he maintained a "proto-ontologist" and "realistic" conception of metaphysics; against Galilei – whom, however, Fabri did not explicitly mention – he asserted the separation between mathematics and physics. Fabri's argumentations reveal the epistemological reasons that induced several early 17th-century university authors to reject the diverse attempts made to abandon the Aristotelian system of sciences and the reading of the Stagirite's works.
Research Interests:
Zaccaria Pasqualigo developed his doctrine concerning the nature of metaphysics and of its object in the Twenties of the 17th century. It belongs to the group of reactions, in the Catholic milieu, to the theses propounded by Francisco... more
Zaccaria Pasqualigo developed his doctrine concerning the nature of metaphysics and of its object in the Twenties of the 17th century. It belongs to the group of reactions, in the Catholic milieu, to the theses propounded by Francisco Suárez on this topic. Pasqualigo develops a metaphysics whose formal object is not the transcendental being, but the being considered as the way of being of the 'quidditas rei omnino abstrahens a materia'. However, the ‘prescinding from matter’ that is proper of this being is not understood by Pasqualigo as an indifference to what is material and to what is spiritual. On the contrary, according to this author the being that metaphysics deals with is intrinsically material. Therefore, metaphysics deals with material being considered apart from matter purely by means of an operation of the mind. As a result, according to Pasqualigo metaphysics is a science superior to physics, but it is not a science superior to rational theology; actually, Pasqualigo’s metaphysics is almost completely separated from whatever kind of theology.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This article is divided, de facto, into two sections. The first provides an examination of Mastri’s doctrine regarding the contraction of the transcendental being in the form of a confutation, on a historical level, of the criticisms... more
This article is divided, de facto, into two sections. The first provides an examination of Mastri’s doctrine regarding the contraction of the transcendental being in the form of a confutation, on a historical level, of the criticisms formulated by Lukáš Novák (and John Punch). The second illustrates Mastri’s doctrine regarding the univocity of this being in the form of a presentation of the most delicate passages in Mastri’s argumentation. As regards Novák’s first criticism, we maintain that Mastri’s works are not lacking in pages which demonstrate the distinction between the nature of the extra-mental foundation of transcendentals and the nature of the extra-mental foundation of predicamentals. Predicamentals regard things not radically different from one another and such as can be made up of a potential principle and an active principle; to put it succinctly, they concern finite things, adequately conceived. Transcendentals, on the other hand, regard radically different things, of which at least one is infinite. This means that in the case of transcendentals we must admit that they are inadequate concepts, based “a parte rei” on a simple embryonic likeness, which is conceived in the form of a conceptual content common only through the work of the intellect. On the other hand, in the case of predicamentals we must admit that they are adequate concepts, based “a parte rei” on a distinction endowed with reality independently of the work of the mind. As regards Novák’s second criticism, we maintain first of all that it arises from a misunderstanding of Mastri’s doctrine regarding modal distinction. According to Mastri, the modal distinction that exists between something real (like a “formalitas” too) and its mode is a distinction which belongs to the family of real distinctions; however, the modal distinction that exists between an inadequate conceptual content (as are transcendentals) and its intrinsic mode is a distinction which belongs to the family of the distinctions of reason. Hence Mastri’s theory whereby the distinction between a being and its intrinsic modes is a virtual distinction (that is a distinction of reason “cum fundamento in re”) is coherent. In the second place, we observe that, according to Mastri, both the infinite being and the finite being are indivisible essences and that, consequently, both the concept of a being common to God and creatures and the concepts of infinity and finitude are inadequate conceptual contents. This means that the concepts of infinity and finitude explain (or rather do not explain) the essential difference between God and creatures to the same extent to which the concept of being explains (or rather does not explain) what they have in common. Nevertheless just as the latter is able to express to the human mind the embryonic likeness between God and creatures, so the former are able (to the extent to which they add a specification regarding the degrees of existence respectively of the infinite being and the finite being) to express the essential difference between God and creatures. More appropriately, we could say that the transcendental being, the mode of infinity, that of finitude, and the compositions of the former with the latter are the manifestations to the mind of the work with which the mind itself grasps the infinite being, the finite being and their relations of likeness and difference. Mastri’s tortuous argumentation derives from his effort to identify a subtle but difficult middle way between nominalism, Thomism, and the Scotism professed by most of Scotus’ followers, in a field already crowded with attempts at mediation. As regards the formation of the “ratio entis” and its contraction to its inferiors, Mastri’s doctrine can be thus summarized. The “ratio entis” is formed not by the grasping of a “formalitas” (against most Scotists), but rather by confusing abstraction; nevertheless such abstraction takes place not by reasoning reason (“ratio ratiocinans”) – against the “nominales” – , but rather by reasoned reason (“ratio ratiocinata”). Vice versa, the “ratio entis” is contracted not by explicitation (neither by reasoning reason – against the “nominales” –, nor by reasoned reason – against the Thomists, even the eclectic ones –), but rather by composition; nevertheless such contraction takes place not by real composition (against most Scotists), but rather by composition of reasoned reason. Mastri also looks for a middle way regarding the question of the univocal or analogous nature of being. Against those who deny that the transcendental being is unitary and univocal, he maintains the following theses: being is perfectly distinct from its inferiors; with respect to modes, ultimate differences, and transcendental “rationes” it is predicated not quidditatively, but rather identically; the inequality of being’s inferiors is not intrinsic to being. Against those who deny that the transcendental being is analogous, and maintain that it is a genus, he holds the following theses: with respect to non-ultimate differences, being is predicated quidditatively; the inequality of being’s inferiors is extrinsic to being, but the foundation of the former is intrinsic to the latter; the immediate inferiors of being are radically different. We examine these theories and their presuppositions; nevertheless, we confess our own difficulty in understanding some passages in Mastri’s argumentation.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
During the last decades of the 16th and the beginning of the 17th centuries, one of the fiercest – and arguably decisive – disputes in the history of Western Thought took place: the debate, within Catholicism, on the solution of the ever... more
During the last decades of the 16th and the beginning of the 17th centuries, one of the fiercest – and arguably decisive – disputes in the history of Western Thought took place: the debate, within Catholicism, on the solution of the ever lasting puzzle of the compossibility of divine omnipotent action and infallible omniscient foreknowledge, on the one hand, and the freedom of created wills, on the other. Báñez and the strict Thomists relied on the abyss of God's infinite power: God is so deeply mighty to determine the creatures to want freely what they freely want, they argued. Molina and the eclectic Thomists (following Ockham) relied on the abyss of God's infinite knowledge: God is so deeply intelligent to grasp what the creatures freely, i.e. autonomously, want, argued the latter. According to some 17th century Scotists, both the aforementioned solutions are ineffectual: the first fails to secure the possibility of what is normally meant with the expression “freedom of the will”; the second fails to secure God's omniscience. In order to find a solution, the Scotist, Giuseppe La Napola, developed an idea embryonically conceived by Duns Scotus. According to La Napola, the only viable solution consists in relying on the abyss of God's infinite freedom: God is so deeply free to be able to simulate in himself what the creatures would have wanted if they were not dependent on God; consequently, He can determine them to want precisely the outcome of that previous simulation. Bartolomeo Mastri analytically and thoroughly examined and disputed both the positions of the strict Thomists and of the eclectic Thomist, and elucidated and propounded La Napola's theory. This essay gives an account of the debate and takes stock of it.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The historical issue concerning the difficulties encountered by scientists in the early decades of the 17th century has often been addressed in terms of a friction between science and religion, or between science and ‘traditional... more
The historical issue concerning the difficulties encountered by scientists in the early decades of the 17th century has often been addressed in terms of a friction between science and religion, or between science and ‘traditional knowledge’. This historiographical approach indeed focuses on fundamental aspects of the question, yet also has some limitations. First of all, it does not display explicitly the framework of the specifically political dynamics within which thinkers at the turn of the 16th century had to work. Furthermore, it does not bring out the multifaceted nature of so-called ‘traditional knowledge’ and the complexity of the latter’s ties with the various centres of political power, besides with the new science itself. This paper intends to draw attention to these aspects of the question by examining two exemplary cases of that historical age: Cesare Cremonini (1550-1631) and Galileo Galilei (1564-1642). Both these thinkers developed close relations with political power to ensure that they could formulate and divulge their doctrines, yet they adopted different strategies. The former saw a danger to free thought and speech in the political and cultural project of the Roman Catholic Church, a danger he firmly opposed, which he was able to do partly thanks to his post at Padua University. The latter, on the contrary, whose position in the university system was weaker, attempted to gain support among absolutist political powers, in particular the Roman Catholic Church itself. His choice, however, proved counterproductive since he became a victim not only of his own maladroit tactics but also of the clash among the diverse politico-religious factions in the Catholic Church and of the unwillingness of the Roman Curia to permit the circulation of theories that originated outside the circles that were granted its approval.
Research Interests:
For more than fifty years, Cesare Cremonini (1550-1631) was a professor of natural philosophy at the Universities of Ferrara and Padua. From the chairs of these universities, he interpreted and advocated with subtlety the Aristotelian... more
For more than fifty years, Cesare Cremonini (1550-1631) was a professor of natural philosophy at the Universities of Ferrara and Padua. From the chairs of these universities, he interpreted and advocated with subtlety the Aristotelian epistemology and physics; as one of the most famous man of culture of his time, he took part in a number of cultural and philosophical debates. Precisely in its role as a university lecturer, he contributed significantly to defend the University of Padua from the hegemonic plans of Papal Curia and Society of Jesus and to preserve the spirit of religious tolerance and theoretical rigour that students of the time already recognized as characteristic of that institution of learning.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Il materiale documentario prodotto, direttamente o indirettamente, dalle università e dai collegi durante la loro storia è abbondantissimo e diversifica-to. Statuti, rotuli dei docenti, matricole delle nationes, atti delle universitates e... more
Il materiale documentario prodotto, direttamente o indirettamente, dalle università e dai collegi durante la loro storia è abbondantissimo e diversifica-to. Statuti, rotuli dei docenti, matricole delle nationes, atti delle universitates e dei collegi dottorali, atti di addottoramento, progetti di riforma, dispute, peri-zie, oltre, ovviamente, a orazioni per le occasioni più varie: apertura dell'anno accademico, feste dei santi protettori, nomine dei rettori, conseguimento del titolo dottorale. Alle tipologie ora elencate ne vanno aggiunte due di partico-lare rilevanza: le lezioni tenute dai docenti in occasione del loro insediamento e le lezioni inaugurali dei singoli corsi. 1 Le lezioni inaugurali dei singoli corsi sono un terreno di ricerca ancora scarsamente esplorato. Si tratta di testi costituiti solitamente da poche carte, usualmente giunti fino a noi in un'unica copia, talvolta a stampa, talvolta ma-noscritti, in alcuni casi depositati in fondi archivistici, in altri casi in fondi di biblioteche, non sempre raccolti in collezioni coese e ben individuate, e-a 1 Si tratta di tipologie usualmente ben distinte, sebbene nel contesto degli studia pubblici italiani in età di antico regime talvolta coincidano.
The whole volume can be read here: http://www.didaschein.net/ojs/index.php/QuadernidiNoctua/issue/view/24/showToc
The whole volume can be read here: http://www.didaschein.net/ojs/index.php/QuadernidiNoctua/issue/view/24/showToc
Research Interests:
DArIL (www.daril.eu) is an Internet site aiming to provide scholars with a free access to a digital collection of searchable descriptions, digital photo-reproductions and encoded editions of inaugural lectures delivered at Renaissance and... more
DArIL (www.daril.eu) is an Internet site aiming to provide scholars with a free access to a digital collection of searchable descriptions, digital photo-reproductions and encoded editions of inaugural lectures delivered at Renaissance and Early Modern universities. Scholars of university history know that each of the countless inaugural lectures till extant in archives and libraries is an interesting document, revealing the tenets of university culture in a specific place and time; however, few research campaigns have been conducted on these documents. Main obstacles to these enterprises are the large number of extant documents and their dispersion. DArIL aims to facilitate scholars to overcome these difficulties. At present, DArIL’s database comprises only 110 documents preserved in a specific archive series in the Archivio Antico of the University of Padua; notwithstanding, DArIL’s infrastructure has been created with a more extensive aim: to permit the archive to include and to make freely available metadata, digital photo-reproductions and semi-diplomatic encoded editions of any inaugural lecture produced at any university or college from the beginning of the Renaissance to the years around the end of the eighteenth century. Anyone can submit materials to be stored in the database, both individual scholars and research teams; their work will be explicitly recognized and exhibited in the metadata accompanying each single document.
Research Interests:
Among the seventeenth-century promoters of Scotism, Bartolomeo Mastri (1602–1673) was conspicuous for the scope of his work, his knowledge of the authors and debates of his time, and for his refined interpretations of the philosophy and... more
Among the seventeenth-century promoters of Scotism, Bartolomeo Mastri (1602–1673) was conspicuous for the scope of his work, his knowledge of the authors and debates of his time, and for his refined interpretations of the philosophy and theology of John Duns Scotus. These qualities make him a precious source for an accurate understanding of seventeenth-century university thought. They have also made him an important, though not always explicitly mentioned, point of reference for more than a few modern readers of Scotus.
Research Interests:
Nota. Versione successiva, non disponibile all'autore: Bartolomeo Mastri da Meldola (1602-1673) "riformatore" dell’Accademia degli Imperfetti, in "Studi romagnoli", 52 (2001), pp. 371-400.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The article aims to elucidate the genesis of the concepts of “scholastic philosophy” and “second scholasticism”. The researches hitherto conducted on the history of the concept of “scholasticism” do not seem to have addressed the possible... more
The article aims to elucidate the genesis of the concepts of “scholastic philosophy” and “second scholasticism”. The researches hitherto conducted on the history of the concept of “scholasticism” do not seem to have addressed the possible difference between the history of the concept of “scholastic philosophy” and the history of the concepts of “scholastic theology” and “scholasticism”. In this study, the thesis is advanced that the history of the concept of “scholastic philosophy” is interrelated but not identical with the history of those two concepts, and clues are presented about the timing and manner in which, from early modern times to the beginning of the twentieth century, the adjective “scholasticus” was used to characterise a type of philosophy which is conceived to be at variance with the one practised by modern authors. The results of this inquiry provide the basis for determining the reasons that, in the 1940s, led Carlo Giacon to formulate the notion of “second scholasticism”, displaying Giacon’s historiographical convictions and theoretical perspectives.
Research Interests:
Durante il Rinascimento e nella prima metà del Seicento la filosofia universitaria si sviluppa in un serrato confronto tra le differenti anime della Classicità e del Medioevo. In questo composito scenario la matematizzazione della fisica... more
Durante il Rinascimento e nella prima metà del Seicento la filosofia universitaria si sviluppa in un serrato confronto tra le differenti anime della Classicità e del Medioevo. In questo composito scenario la matematizzazione della fisica costituisce il principale elemento di discontinuità rispetto al passato. La dinamica dialettica che sorge dalla globalità di questi fattori riplasma la cultura universitaria in una molteplicità di forme, fornisce alcuni degli elementi portanti dei sistemi filosofici dell’Età Moderna e, dai primi decenni del Settecento, è a propria volta forgiata da questi ultimi.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Presentazione dell'edizione critica del "Liber dierum lucensium" di Giovanni Caroli a cura di Amos Edelheit
Firenze, Salone Multimediale del Comune di Firenze
Sabato, 23 giugno 2018 ore 17
Firenze, Salone Multimediale del Comune di Firenze
Sabato, 23 giugno 2018 ore 17
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Tutti i saggi del volume convergono nel sottolineare, da punti di vista anche molto diversi, i temi di fondo della riflessione teorica e storica di Roberto Garaventa, in particolare lo snodo della finitudine e della caducità e quello,... more
Tutti i saggi del volume convergono nel sottolineare, da punti di vista anche molto diversi, i temi di fondo della riflessione teorica e storica di Roberto Garaventa, in particolare lo snodo della finitudine e della caducità e quello, strettamente connesso al precedente, della libertà religiosa e della sua comunicazione.
Research Interests:
Universität Siegen, Guest Erasmus Lectures, 2-4 May 2024 – These lectures were intended to present a concise history of the development of the notions of ‘scholastic philosophy’ and ‘second scholasticism’, to expose their modern origins... more
Universität Siegen, Guest Erasmus Lectures, 2-4 May 2024 – These lectures were intended to present a concise history of the development of the notions of ‘scholastic philosophy’ and ‘second scholasticism’, to expose their modern origins and biases, to demonstrate their criticalities and to warn against their inadequacy to express and describe the historical phenomena to which they are usually referred. Here I offer the texts I have read and commented on for this purpose.