10 found
Sort by:
See also:
  1. Michael J. Fitzgerald (forthcoming). The 'Mysterious' Thomas Manlevelt and Albert of Saxony. History and Philosophy of Logic:1-18.
    The essay casts doubt upon the view that Albert was criticizing or was dependent upon Thomas Manlevelt's logico-philosophical views, and counter argues that it is in fact Manlevelt who knows and cites Albert's views in his recently edited Porphyrian Questions, rather than vice versa. The argument for this conclusion proceeds in two stages. First, it is argued that the brief comment Albert makes about ‘conjunct descent’ (descensus copulatim) in treating the definition of merely confused supposition his Perutilis Logica does not (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Michael J. Fitzgerald (2012). Unconfusing Merely Confused Supposition in Albert of Saxony. Vivarium 50 (2):161-189.
    In this essay I argue that Albert would reject the need for a separate fourth mode of common personal supposition, and that his view of merely confused supposition has not been fully explicated by modern scholars. I first examine the various examples of conjunct descent given by modern scholars from his Perutilis logica , and show that Albert clearly adopts it in resolving the sophistic examples involved. Second, I explicate the view of merely confused supposition that Albert defends in his (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Michael J. Fitzgerald (2009). Time as a Part of Physical Objects: The Modern 'Descartes-Minus Argument' and an Analogous Argument From Fourteenth-Century Logic (William Heytesbury and Albert of Saxony). Vivarium 47 (1):54-73.
  4. Michael J. Fitzgerald (2008). Logic and Ontology in the Syllogistic of Robert Kilwardby. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Philosophy 46 (3):pp. 482-483.
  5. Michael J. Fitzgerald (2006). Problems with Temporality and Scientific Propositions in John Buridan and Albert of Saxony. Vivarium 44 (s 2-3):305-337.
    The essay develops two major arguments. First, if John Buridan's 'first argument' for the reintroduction of natural supposition is only that the "eternal truth" of a scientific proposition is preserved because subject terms in scientific propositions supposit for all the term's past, present, and future significata indifferently; then Albert of Saxony thinks it is simply ineffective. Only the 'second argument', i.e. the argument for the existence of an 'atemporal copula', adequately performs this task; but is rejected by Albert. Second, later (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Michael J. Fitzgerald (2003). The Medieval Roots of Reliabilist Epistemology: Albert of Saxony's View of Immediate Apprehension. Synthese 136 (3):409 - 434.
    In the essay I first argue that Albert ofSaxony's defense of perceptual ``directrealism'' is in fact a forerunner of contemporaryforms of ``process reliabilist''epistemologies. Second, I argue that Albert's defenseof perceptual direct realism has aninteresting consequence for his philosophy oflanguage. His semantic notion of `naturalsignification' does not require any semanticintermediary entity called a `concept' or`description', to function as the directsignificatum of written or spoken termsfor them to designate perceptual objects. AlthoughAlbert is inspired by Ockham's mentalact theory, I conclude that Albert seemsto (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Michael J. Fitzgerald (1990). The Real Difficulty with Burley's Realistic Semantics. Vivarium 28 (1):17-25.
  8. Willemien Otten, Michael J. Fitzgerald & C. H. Kneepkens (1990). Brill Online Books and Journals. Vivarium 28 (1).
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Michael J. Fitzgerald (1984). An Interpretative Dilemma in Burlean Semantics. Franciscan Studies 44 (1):181-192.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Michael J. Fitzgerald (1978). Ockham's Implicit Priority of Analysis Rule? Franciscan Studies 38 (1):213-219.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation