6 found
Order:
Disambiguations:
John Laumakis [5]John A. Laumakis [2]
  1.  29
    John Laumakis (2004). Aquinas' Misinterpretation of Avicebron on the Activity of Corporeal Substances: Fons Vitae II, 9 and 10. Modern Schoolman 81 (2):135-149.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  4
    John Laumakis (2016). Playing to Your Opponent’s Weakness – or Strength. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 43 (3):394-408.
    Playing to your opponent’s weakness is a strategy commonly adopted in head-to-head sports. I argue, however, that competitors in head-to-head sports should adopt the opposite strategy: playing to your opponent’s strength. To do so, I first distinguish two senses of victory and explain what constitutes a meaningful victory in head-to-head sports. I then examine the implications of mutualism as exhibited in Robert L. Simon’s view that sport is a mutual quest for excellence through challenge. Finally, I defend the notion that (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  12
    John Laumakis (1999). The Voluntarism of William of Auvergne and Some Evidence of the Contrary. Modern Schoolman 76 (4):303-312.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4.  11
    John Laumakis (2001). Avicebron (Solomon Ibn Gabirol) on Creation Ex Nihilo. Modern Schoolman 79 (1):41-55.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  11
    John Laumakis (2006). Aquinas and Avicebron on the Causality of Corporeal Substances. Modern Schoolman 84 (1):17-29.
  6.  11
    John A. Laumakis (2003). Weisheipl's Interpretation of Avicebron's Doctrine of the Divine Will. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (1):37-55.
    In his interpretation of Avicebron’s doctrine of the divine will, Weisheipl claims that Avicebron is a voluntarist because he holds that God’s will is superior to God’s intelligence. Yet, by reexamining his Fons vitae, I argue that Avicebron is not a voluntarist. For, according to Avicebron, God’s will can be considered in two ways—(1) as inactive or (2) as active—and in neither case is God’s will superior to God’s intelligence. I conclude by noting that if, as Weisheipl contends, Avicebron—and not (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography