The second volume in this series devoted to the writings of the English Dominican Robert Kilwardby, this work presents the Latin text of two Oxford treatises from the 1250s--one on time, the other on imagination. The treatise on time discusses its reality, connection with change, unity and beginning, the instant and time's relationship to eternity; the one on imagination examines the way imagery is acquired, retained and transmitted, and the relation between heart and head in the workings of (...) common sense. (shrink)

The editio princeps of the first Medieval introduction to philosophy that makes use of the full range of Aristotle's writings.

The second volume in this series devoted to the writings of the English Dominican Robert Kilwardby, this work presents the Latin text of two Oxford treatises from the 1250s--one on time, the other on imagination. The treatise on time discusses its reality, connection with change, unity and beginning, the instant and time's relationship to eternity; the one on imagination examines the way imagery is acquired, retained and transmitted, and the relation between heart and head in the workings of (...) common sense. (shrink)

Robert Kilwardby on the Human Soul examines Kilwardby’s role in conciliating Aristotelian and Augustinian views on the soul, soul-body relation, and cognition.

The growing sophistication of philosophical speculation together with the increasingly contentious claims of the thirteenth-century masters of Arts and Theology is reflected in the literary career of Robert Kilwardby. As a young Parisian Arts master, Kilwardby devoted much of his energy to explaining the works of Aristotle, recently introduced into the University’s curriculum. Although particularly interested in the logical treatises, Kilwardby most likely commented upon the so-called ‘Ethica vetus et nova’, which were part of the Arts (...) curriculum in the first half of the thirteenth century. Kilwardby’s commentary, while quickly superseded by the more complicated questions on the entire Ethics, represents an extremely important transitional phase in the understanding of Aristotle’s moral philosophy. Kilwardby’s careful reading of Aristotle’s text allowed him to reject the usual religious interpretation of his contemporaries. His awareness of the limitations of moral science marks a decisive step away from the earlier reading of the Nicomachean Ethics (EN), which viewed Aristotle’s doctrine of the human good to be identical with the religious ideal of union with God. As a result, Kilwardby’s commentary on the EN demonstrated how Aristotle’s ethics could no longer be understood as a slight variant of Christian moral theology. (shrink)

Robert Kilwardby occupies an important place in the history of logic, and the history of western thought more generally. Perhaps best known to scholars for his Oxford condemnations of 1277...

In this article, I discuss Robert Kilwardby’s theory of judgement and consider its implications for his view of truth and falsity. I start by considering Kilwardby’s claim that truth and falsity are primarily found in composite thought, i.e. judgement. I then examine his distinction between two different kinds of being, namely real and conceptual, arguing that different kinds of true judgement, according to Kilwardby, have different kinds of existential import, either real or merely conceptual. Since (...) class='Hi'>Kilwardby develops his position by commenting on Aristotle’s logical treatises, an important aim of the article is that of showing how he addresses exegetical issues in those sources and offers solutions that go beyond Aristotle’s alleged intentions. The focus of the paper is on negative judgement because that is where Kilwardby diverges from Aristotle most conspicuously. (shrink)

Robert Kilwardby is a central figure in late medieval philosophy and theology, but key areas of his thought still remain unexamined in a systematic way. This book offers a comprehensive overview of his works, ranging from topics in logic to theology, done in a way that is accessible to non-specialists and to anyone interested in medieval thought.

This work contains the Latin text of an early medieval commentary on the first three books of Aristotle's Ethics. The commentary appears here in print for the first time, supported by an introduction considering the significance of the work and the attribution of it to the Dominican author, Robert Kilwardby (c. 1215-1279). Celano argues that the commentary represents an early phase in the reception of Aristotle's Ethics in the thirteenth century, and that Kilwardby demonstrates a perceptive understanding (...) of the meaning of Aristotle's moral philosophy showing its importance for the curriculum in the Arts Faculties of universities in the Middle Ages. (shrink)

The article is concerned with the account of Aristotle's theory of disputation given by Robert Kilwardby in his commentary, composed in Paris during the 1240s, on Aristotle's Prior Analytics. Specifically, I show that Kilwardby covers demonstrative as well as dialectical disputations, and gives an elementary account of the rules governing such disputations, in their adversarial forms as well as in an idealized form where the interlocutors engage in a cooperative activity. I describe the resemblances and the differences (...) between disputations as theorized by Kilwardby and the game of obligationes as understood by some of his contemporaries. (shrink)

Every educated person in the Middle Ages learned logic, which was then always some version of the theory of the syllogism. But until the rise of the universities in the thirteenth century no scholar in Christendom had written a comprehensive commentary on the work of Aristotle's that contains that theory, namely the Prior Analytics. Robert Kilwardby was an English scholar who lectured on logic and grammar at the University of Paris in the 1230s. His lectures earned him widespread (...) fame in Europe. Throughout the thirteenth century and up to the sixteenth,Kilwardby's lectures on Aristotle's Prior Analytics were considered to contain the authoritative exposition of Aristotle's syllogistic logic. They were published at Venice in 1499. (shrink)

Every educated person in the Middle Ages learned logic, which was then always some version of the theory of the syllogism. But until the rise of the universities in the thirteenth century no scholar in Christendom had written a comprehensive commentary on the work of Aristotle's that contains that theory, namely the Prior Analytics. Robert Kilwardby was an English scholar who lectured on logic and grammar at the University of Paris in the 1230s. His lectures earned him widespread (...) fame in Europe. Throughout the thirteenth century and up to the sixteenth,Kilwardby's lectures on Aristotle's Prior Analytics were considered to contain the authoritative exposition of Aristotle's syllogistic logic. They were published at Venice in 1499. (shrink)

In this article, I discuss Robert Kilwardby’s theory of judgement and consider its implications for his view of truth and falsity. I start by considering Kilwardby’s claim that truth and falsity are primarily found in composite thought, i.e. judgement. I then examine his distinction between two different kinds of being, namely real and conceptual, arguing that different kinds of true judgement, according to Kilwardby, have different kinds of existential import, either real or merely conceptual. Since (...) class='Hi'>Kilwardby develops his position by commenting on Aristotle’s logical treatises, an important aim of the article is that of showing how he addresses exegetical issues in those sources and offers solutions that go beyond Aristotle’s alleged intentions. The focus of the paper is on negative judgement because that is where Kilwardby diverges from Aristotle most conspicuously. (shrink)

Paul Thom's book presents Kilwardby's science of logic as a body of demonstrative knowledge about inferences and their validity, about the semantics of non-modal and modal propositions, and about the logic of genus and species. This science is thoroughly intensional. It grounds the logic of inference on "that in virtue of which" the inference holds. It bases the truth conditions of propositions on relations between conceptual entities. It explains the logic of genus and species through the notion of essence. (...) Thom interprets this science as a formal logic of intensions with its own proof theory and semantics. This comprehensive reconstruction of Kilwardby's logic shows the medieval master to be one of the most interesting logicians of the thirteenth century. (shrink)

This article discusses the theories of perception of Robert Kilwardby and Peter of John Olivi. Our aim is to show how in challenging certain assumptions of medieval Aristotelian theories of perception they drew on Augustine and argued for the active nature of the soul in sense perception. For both Kilwardby and Olivi, the soul is not passive with respect to perceived objects; rather, it causes its own cognitive acts with respect to external objects and thus allows the (...) subject to perceive them. We also show that Kilwardby and Olivi differ substantially regarding where the activity of the soul is directed to and the role of the sensible species in the process, and we demonstrate that there are similarities between their ideas of intentionality and the attention of the soul towards the corporeal world. (shrink)

Volume 41, Issue 3, August 2020, Page 301-303.

New Blackfriars, Volume 102, Issue 1100, Page 586-587, July 2021.

The first full-length study of Robert Kilwardby's commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics, based on a study of the medieval manuscripts.

The main claim I defend in this paper is that Robert Kilwardby, a thirteenth-century Dominican philosopher, construed bodily pain as a fully-fledged intentional state of the sensory soul. To prove this, I first examine Kilwarby’s account of how pain comes to be and how the sensory soul experiences it. I then show that pain cannot be reduced to a feeling the sensory soul experiences for the simple reason that pain has representational content, and is thus also directed at (...) something. (shrink)

In the last 30 years there has been growing interest in and a greater appreciation of the unique contributions that medieval authors have made to the history of logic. In this thesis, we compare and contrast the modal logics of Robert Kilwardby and John Buridan and explore how their two conceptions of modality relate to and differ from modern notions of modal logic. We develop formal reconstructions of both authors' logics, making use of a number of different formal (...) techniques. In the case of Robert Kilwardby we show that using his distinction between per se and per accidens modalities, he is able to provide a consistent interpretation of the apodictic fragment of Aristotle's modal syllogism and that, by generalising this distinction to hypothetical construction, he can develop an account of connexive logic. In the case of John Buridan we show that his modal logic is a natural extension of the usual Kripke-style possible worlds semantics, and that this modal logic can be shown to be sound and complete relative to a proof-theoretic formalisation of Buridan's treatment of the expository syllogism. (shrink)

In this book we present the first study of all of his philosophical works from logic and grammar to metaphysics and ethics. It contains a substantial introduction about Kilwardby's life and work as well as a comprehensive bibliography.

In his Questions I, qq. 35-36 Sent. Robert Kilwardby asks whether divine understanding (intelligere) is the same as the divine speaking (dicere), as Anselm says in Monologion, ch. 63, just as for us mental speaking (mentis locutio) is the same as the thinker's examination (inspectio cogitantis) or mental seeing (videre in mente). His answer is that neither for us nor for God is the equation correct, because understanding lacks an essential characteristic of speech, i.e. referentiality, and because speaking (...) is active and understanding passive, which is reflected in the meanings (impositiones) and grammatical functions (modi significandi) of the corresponding expressions. Kilwardby does concede in his discussion of the speech of angels in II Sent. q. 56 that when inner speech does occur, and remains internal, it amounts to thought, though with the additional element of referentiality. I suggest that Kilwardby is unwilling accept Augustine's theory that thought is inner speech, as Anselm does, because it would require him to reject Aristotelian-style philosophical psychology. (shrink)

New Blackfriars, Volume 102, Issue 1101, Page 623-636, September 2021.

This book will be of interest to advanced students in philosophy, historians of logic and medieval philosophy, as well as logicians who wish to understand the significant contribution that Robert Kilwardby's thirteenth-century commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics made to those fields. Paul Thom's analysis treats Kilwardby's views on propositions, syllogisms, reduction, necessity, and contingency with depth and finesse, revealing what he takes to be the Aristotelian ontology underlying them. Helpful summaries remind the reader of the important formal (...) and ontological results of each chapter. The book is a genuine logical treat, despite a misleading typo of '' for '' at page 108, l.26, and the fact that most readers will need a good, strong magnifying glass for some of Brill's printed type and superscripts. I found only a couple of drawbacks. (shrink)

In “Lectio 55” of his Notule libri Priorum, Robert Kilwardby discussed various objections that had been raised against Aristotle’s Theses. The first thesis, AT1, says that no proposition q is implied both by a proposition p and by its negation, ∼p. AT2 says that no proposition p is implied by its own negation. In Prior Analytics, Aristotle had shown that AT2 entails AT1, and he argued that the assumption of a proposition p such that (∼p → p) would (...) be “absurd”. The unrestricted validity of AT1, AT2, however, is at odds with other principles which were widely accepted by medieval logicians, namely the law Ex Impossibili Quodlibet, EIQ, and the rules of disjunction introduction. Since, according to EIQ, the impossible proposition (p ∧ ∼p) implies every proposition, it also implies ∼(p∧∼p), in contradiction to AT2. Furthermore, by way of disjunction introduction, the proposition (p∨∼p) is implied both by p and by ∼p, in contradiction to AT1. Kilwardby tried to defend AT1, AT2 against these objections by claiming that EIQ holds only for accidental but not for natural implications. The second argument, however, cannot be refuted in this way because Kilwardby had to admit that every disjunction (p ∨ q) is naturally implied by its disjuncts. He therefore introduced the further requirement that, in order to constitute a genuine counterexample to AT1, (p → q) and (∼p → q) have to hold “by virtue of the same thing”. In a recently published paper, Spencer Johnston accepted this futile defence of AT1 and developed a formal semantics that would fit Kilwardby’s presumably connexive implication. This procedure, however, is misguided because the remaining considerations of Lesson 55  which were entirely ignored by Johnston  show that Kilwardby eventually recognized that AT2 is bound to fail. After all he concluded: “So it should be granted that from the impossible its opposite follows, and that the necessary follows from its opposite”. (shrink)

In the present article I examine Robert Kilwardby’s reading of Augustine’s and Anselm’s theories of the verbum mentis. The article is divided into three sections. In the first, I examine how Kilwardby’s criterion for personal distinction within the divine Trinity is applied to the powers of the rational soul. Kilwardby considers Anselm’s understanding of the Augustinian solution unable to support the real distinction of persons. In the two remaining sections, I inspect the two models of thinking: (...) thinking as speaking and thinking as seeing. It will be argued that Kilwardby accepts the seeing model and rejects the speaking model. (shrink)