David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Vivarium 46 (3):232-252 (2008)
Albertus Magnus favours the Aristotelian definition of the soul as the first actuality or perfection of a natural body having life potentially. But he interprets Aristotle's vocabulary in a way that it becomes compatible with the separability of the soul from the body. The term “perfectio” is understood as referring to the soul's activity only, not to its essence. The term “forma” is avoided as inadequate for defining the soul's essence. The soul is understood as a substance which exists independently of its actions and its body. The article shows that Albertus' terminological decisions continue a tradition reaching from the Greek commentators, and John Philoponos in particular, to Avicenna. Albertus' position on another important issue is also influenced by Arabic sources. His defense of the unity of the soul's vegetative, animal and rational parts rests on arguments from Avicenna and Averroes. It is shown that Averroes' position on the problem is not clearcut: he advocates the unity thesis, but also teaches the plurality of the generic and individual forms in man. This double stance is visible in the Latin reception of Averroes' works, and also in Albertus, who presents Averroes both as supporter and opponent of the plurality thesis.
|Keywords||AVICENNA ARABIC PHILOSOPHY AVERROES PHILOSOPHY OF THE SOUL ALBERTUS MAGNUS DE ANIMA MEDIEVAL LATIN PHILOSOPHY|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
M. Pakaluk (2003). Degrees of Separation in the "Phaedo". Phronesis 48 (2):89 - 115.
Averroës (2002). Averroës' Middle Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima: A Critical Edition of the Arabic Text. Brigham Young University Press.
Thérèse-Anne Druart (2000). The Human Soul's Individuation and its Survival After the Body's Death: Avicenna on the Causal Relation Between Body and Soul. Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 10 (2):259-273.
Alexey R. Fokin (2009). The Relationship Between Soul and Spirit in Greek and Latin Patristic Thought. Faith and Philosophy 26 (5):599-614.
A. P. Bos (2003). The Soul and Its Instrumental Body: A Reinterpretation of Aristotle's Philosophy of Living Nature. Brill.
J. S. & M. Gary (2008). Plotinus on the Soul's Omnipresence in Body. International Journal of the Platonic Tradition 2 (2):113-127.
Dag Nikolaus Hasse (2000). Avicenna's De Anima in the Latin West: The Formation of a Peripatetic Philosophy of the Soul 1160-1300. The Warburg Institute.
Abraham P. Bos (2010). The Soul's Instrument for Touching in Aristotle, on the Soul II 11, 422b34–423a21. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 92 (1):89-102.
Rosalie Osmond (2003). Imagining the Soul: A History. Sutton Pub. Ltd..
Stewart Goetz (2011). A Brief History of the Soul. Wiley-Blackwell.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads29 ( #63,380 of 1,099,958 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #33,415 of 1,099,958 )
How can I increase my downloads?