I start with two contradictory statements: Jaeger, Aristotle, p. 330: ‘Thus all indications point to a late date for the origin of the philosopher's zoological works.’ D'Arcy Thompson, Historia Animalium, Prefatory Note: ‘It can be shown that Aristotle's natural history studies were carried on, or mainly carried on, in his middle age, between his two periods of residence at Athens.‘.

Estudio sobre diferentes aspectos, desde la E. Moderna a la Contemporánea, en el pensamiento de J. Gaos en sus textos de los años 40.

David Balme's major critical edition of Aristotle's largest and perhaps least studied treatise is based on a collation of the 26 known extant manuscripts and a study of the early Latin translations. Begun in 1975, with his work towards the Loeb editio minor of books VII–X, this edition of all ten books, including a very full apparatus criticus, was largely complete by 1989 when Professor Balme died, but it needed extensive work to put it in publishable form. This work has (...) been carried out by Allan Gotthelf, Balme's friend and associate. Volume I of the edition contains the complete text of the Historia Animalium, the critical apparatus, and Balme's introduction to the manuscripts, expanded and updated with the assistance of Friederike Berger, and in consultation with the editors of forthcoming editions of the extant medieval translations. A substantial index to the text has been provided by Liliane Bodson in collaboration with Professor Gotthelf. (shrink)

Il magistero aristotelico nella zoologia comparata rimane saldo fino a tempi di scienza moderna, perché non muta in sostanza nei secoli il metodo aristotelico costituito dalla combinazione dei dati anatomici con quelli fisiologici. Pertanto la straordinaria stabilità assunta dalla biologia aristotelica richiede una riflessione sulle fonti storiche di essa e sui fondamenti del metodo scientifico impiegato da Aristotele nel quadro del suo pensiero biologico presentato in maniera complessiva nelle opere De partibus animalium e Historia Animalium. La riflessione (...) su alcuni aspetti del suo pensiero biologico, ovvero sulla questione della causalità, della sostanza, del metodo dicotomico e comparativo, possa spiegare anche come esse abbiano a un certo punto svolto un ruolo di stimolo e di verifica anche per i temi più generali del suo pensiero filosofico. In effetti, con Aristotele il sapere teoretico della biologia ha conquistato per la prima volta in modo sistematico il grande terreno della natura vivente. Un grande merito di Aristotele filosofo e biologo è quello di aver fondato la scienza della biologia e la filosofia della biologia. (shrink)

Summary Gessner's sources for the pictures in his Historia animalium were varied in kind and in quality. This should be understood within the larger context of the Historia animalium in which Gessner sought to collect everything ever written about animals, an enterprise that could not be completed by a single individual. Just as Gessner did not distil or reduce similar texts but retained these as well as contradictory or false textual descriptions as part of a repository (...) of knowledge, so also Gessner included several pictures of the same animal, false or badly drawn ones, and juxtaposed erroneous and ?true? images. The attribution of images to witnesses and correspondences also reflects Gessner's strategy to credit those who drew his attention to new information first. The sources of Gessner's images thus indicate how his visual world encompassed more than the strictly self-observable, and a pictorial practice that was intimately connected with textual traditions and intellectual networks. (shrink)

Este artículo muestra el probable origen de las concepciones del desarrollo linear ascendente, cuyos representantes más conocidos en la era moderna fueron Hegel y Marx. En contraposición al concepto circular de la evolución histórica, que fue el predominante en muchas culturas, las doctrinas del des..

(*) Este es el capítulo 16 de su obra monumental titulada Retrying Galileo, 1633-1992, publicado en el 2005 por la University of California Press, Berkeley. Este libro es un examen del affair Galileo desde el momento de la condena del científico toscano por la Inquisición en 1633, hasta su supuesta rehabilitación por el Papa Juan Pablo II en 1992. Su enfoque es en temas tales como: si acaso la condena fue justa, y si probaría la incompatibilidad entre ciencia y religión; (...) pone énfasis en los textos que constituyen las fuentes primarias, y de los cuales emergen los hechos históricos y los distintos temas controversiales. El capítulo 17 del mismo estudio del profesor Finocchiaro, contiene una evaluación precisa, realista y balanceada, de los esfuerzos del Papa Juan Pablo II para poner a la Iglesia al día frente al caso Galileo, conjuntamente con una estimación negativa tanto de la comisión papal encargada de su reexamen, como de su presidente, el Cardenal Paul Pourpard. La traducción es de Hermes H. Benítez, y ha sido expresamente autorizadapor la editorial. (shrink)

My suggestion that the H.A. was written during the reign of the Emperor Julian and in his interest has had, on the whole, ‘a bad press.’ Reviewers who have not thought it necessary to support with argument their doubts or their rejection of the theory are in a strong position: they remain practically unassailable. ‘The theory seems on a priori grounds improbable:’ a historical student can only reply that so is human nature—distressingly improbable, as he knows to his cost. ‘After (...) reading this book one puts it down “met een zekere onvoldaanheid:”’ what can an author do save express his regret for having caused Dr. Van de Weerd this discomfort? But two stalwart defenders of the conservative position—De Sanctis and Lécrivain’—have sustained with detailed argument their unqualified rejection of my theory; in their cases it is possible to attempt a rejoinder. (shrink)

As considerações de Merleau-Ponty sobre a historicidade são significativas, tanto como um relato fenomenológico, quanto como um relato existencial de nossa situação histórica. Naturalmente, estes aspectos de seu trabalho não se excluem mutuamente, mas se entrelaçam. E cada aspecto contribui para o sentido da crise da historicidade humana. Primeiro consideraremos a crise fenomenológica da historicidade – ou seja, consideraremos a crise da historicidade fenomenologicamente. Esta é a tentativa de revelar as condições da possibilidade da história a partir da história ou (...) da estrutura de nossa situação histórica – onde a posição de Merleau-Ponty se afasta da fenomenologia husserliana. Em seguida, consideraremos a crise existencial de historicidade – ou seja, consideraremos a crise de historicidade existencialmente. Esta é a tentativa de compreender o imperativo de que as coisas são importantes para nós historicamente. Finalmente, vamos indicar brevemente a importância destes aspectos de nossa historicidade como um entrelaçamento crítico. Este entrelaçamento crítico revela a intrusão mútua do “como” e do “porquê” de nossa historicidade, que Merleau-Ponty descreve no final de sua carreira como uma existência chiasmática dentro da carne do mundo. O cruzamento crítico como interrogatório de nosso ser histórico fornece o “quem”, “o quê”, “quando” e “onde” de nossa historicidade. (shrink)

Anyone making even a cursory study of the intellectual life of medieval Europe will notice everywhere evident a lively interest in animals. The literary manifestation of this interest best known today is the tradition of the bestiary and the closely associated encyclopedia tradition. Such treatments of animals, however, are notable for their less than accurate descriptions wherein the factual was often mixed with the fabulous and preference often shown for the exotic, mythical, and imaginative over the scientific. This changed radically (...) with the scientific revolution of the early thirteenth century and the recovery in the Latin West of the zoological treatises of Aristotle. By 1220 all of Aristotle’s De animalibus was available in a Latin translation made from the Arabic by Michael Scotus at Toledo, and the commentators began to take notice. By mid-century, Albertus Magnus had made the libri de animalibus the centerpiece of his massive literary production introducing Aristotelian natural science to readers of Latin. This was followed in the 1260s by the notable effort of William of Moerbeke to produce a corrected version of the zoology directly from the Greek. (shrink)

Coriolano Alberini was an outstanding philosopher of history in Argentina and a major influence on his country's philosophical thought. A keen student of Kant and Herder, a vigorous opponent of positivism, and a strong admirer of Bergson and Ortega y Gasset, Alberini's distinctive feature was an approach to history which stressed action over speculation. His passion was to promote the development of Argentina's national independence and a genuine national culture. The present volume of his writings was compiled and edited posthumously. (...) The titles of the seven essays show Alberini's absorption with the shaping of his national culture and the preponderant influence on it of European ideas. Of special interest are his articles on the idea of progress in Argentine philosophy, and the influence on Argentine culture of French, German, and English thought. The piece on German influence is published in Spanish for the first time in this volume. In English the titles of the essays are as follows: The Metaphysics of Alberdi; German Philosophy in Argentina; French Thought in Argentine Culture; English Philosophic Thought in Argentina; The Idea of Progress in Argentine Philosophy; Philosophy and International Relations; Genesis and Evolution of Argentine Philosophic Thought; Philosophic Culture in Argentina.--H. B. (shrink)

Juan B. Justo en la historia y el pensamiento argentinos, por A. Solari.--Teoría y práctica de la historia, por M. H. Alberti.--La base biológica de la historia, por F. Escardó.--La técnica, por A. Justo.--La economía, por R. Bogliolo.--La guerra, por A. G. Rodríguez.--La política, por A. Ghioldi.--La lucha de ciases, por R. Mondolfo.--El salariado, por M. Palacín.--Las formas típicas del privilegio, por J. L. Pena.--El gremialismo proletario, por E. Frugoni.--La cooperación libre, por N. Repetto.--La democracia obrera, por (...) L. Pan.--La religión, la cilencia, el arte, por R. Rivière. (shrink)

It is now a widespread opinion among interpreters that Aristotle’s History of Animals is not a mere collection of empirical data but has its own theoretical framework; however, there is still disagreement as to exactly what this framework is. To address the problem, the article analyzes in detail the diairetic schemes of HA I 1, attempting to overturn the common opinion that this chapter is a mere expository introduction to the study of animals’ differences. On the contrary, it will be (...) shown that in this chapter Aristotle not only applies the method of ‘multiple division’ theorized in Parts of Animals I 2–4, but also uses dividing criteria that are informed by his causal theory and his hylomorphist ontology. This analysis will therefore lead to the more controversial conclusion that HA is not an ‘early’ work by Aristotle but a mature treatise with its own specific theoretical aim: the aitiological explanation of the anatomical, eco-physiological and ethological differences among animals. (shrink)

According to Pablo Oyarzun, Benjamin’s concept of history “is not about a war over the representation of history, but a war over history itself. Only in so far as this is its field, there can also be a struggle for its representation”. While Oyarzun’s observation refers to the first “thesis” of Benjamin’s «On the Concept of history», in this article I argue that it can be productively used to shed light onto a broader understanding of the Benjamin’s concept of history. (...) To that end, I elaborate on Oyarzun’s comment in order to analyze and to render explicit the relationship between 'Truth' and 'presentation' in Benjamin’s thought. In doing so, I highlight the relevance of this relationship for the concept of 'History' that Benjamin elaborated in the late ‘30s. (shrink)

In assessing the value of any historical work it is necessary for the investigator to undertake the often frustrating and tedious task of Quellenforschung. In the case of the De Caesaribus the first substantial attempts began in Germany in 1873 and 1874 with the appearance of two important studies by A. Enmann and A. Cohn. Enmann sought to explain the mass of verbal similarities, numerous errors and shared idiosyncrasies to be found in Victor's De Caesaribus, Eutropius' Breviarium 7–10, and parts (...) of the Historia Augusta by postulating a common source which has subsequently come to be known as the Kaisergeschichte. He was so convinced by his findings that he stated , ‘Victor und Eutrop es beide als Haupt – wenn nicht als einzige Quelle benutzt haben’. Working quite independently Cohn's examination of the first eleven chapters led him to conclude that from the beginning of Augustus' sole reign to the death of Domitian Victor, Eutropius and the Epitomator followed a common source which he entitled Suetonius auctus, an account excerpted from Suetonius with some new material added. Enmann, however, had already described the Kaisergeschichte's early chapters in this way and the two were readily identified. One major problem remained. The traditional date of the completion of the HA was still believed to be 305/6; consequently if the K.G. had been used by its authors then the K.G. must have been written by that year. Nevertheless notable similarities between Victor and Eutropius continued apparently till 357 and Enmann therefore suggested a continuation of the K.G. until that date. (shrink)

The significance of the dating of Enmann's Kaisergeschichte in the controversy which has long surrounded the Historia Augusta is common knowledge to all scholars who have more than a nodding acquaintance with the period. Enmann himself concluded that the KG ended with or shortly after Diocletian's accession. This was a necessary hypothesis for Enmann in 1884 because the H.A. had clearly used the KG and the self-proclaimed authorship and dating of the former were generally accepted. None the less in (...) Enmann's opinion the resemblances between Victor and Eutropius continued into the sole reign of Constantius II down to the Battle of Strasbourg in 357 and Enmann was compelled to ascribe this to a ‘continuation’ of the KG. (shrink)

El autor hace un balance pesimista de la situación actual de la universidad española, y explora las alternativas que existen de cara a una posible mejora. Propone descartar opciones poco realistas y se inclina por un reforzamiento de la autonomía del profesor y la simplificación del aparato burocrático.

Perhaps the most remarkable feature of the works in which Ausonius of Bordeaux and Libanius of Antioch, writing within a few years of each other, recall their long and varied careers is that there is so little resemblance between them; the impressions given by these experienced and successful teachers could hardly be more disparate. The reader of Ausonius finds in his Protrepticus a familiar enough picture of the terrors of the schoolroom; his Professores offer at first sight a series of (...) bland commemorations apparently deficient in the interesting information which might be expected from such an archive. Libanius' many volumes, on the other hand, compared where appropriate with the Vitae Sophistarum of Eunapius, present a situation which is well summarised by the following sentences from Walden's work The Universities of Ancient Greece : ‘There was, among the sophists of the fourth century…little, if any, of that spirit of brotherhood… that usually exists in a community of scholars at the present day. Instead there were jealousy, spite and often unrelenting hatred’. This striking divergence between Ausonius and his Eastern counterparts is unlikely to reflect a basic difference between East and West, or between Latin- and Greek-speaking milieux; the complaints of Augustine about his problems in Africa and Rome warn against such a simple answer. When one adds the evidence provided seven centuries later by the Frenchman Peter Abelard, whose plaintive Historia Calamitatum — an account of the disasters he suffered, not those which he caused — is remarkably similar to the prickly self-justification of Libanius in its account of bitter scheming and almost military manoeuvres in the educational world, one is forced to consider whether the evidence of Ausonius is not a serious anomaly, and to seek an explanation. (shrink)

Resumen Este artículo ofrece una lectura de la pintura renacentista según los principios establecidos por Leon Battista Alberti, uno de los primeros teóricos de la perspectiva en cuyo Tratado de pintura se refiere al cuadro como “una ventana abierta a la historia”. El concepto de historia empleado por Alberti, que se presta a numerosas interpretaciones, es abordado a partir de las reflexiones de Erwin Panofsky en torno a la perspectiva como “forma simbólica”, avanzando hacia una hipótesis en torno (...) al carácter simbólico de la configuración y representación del tiempo en el cuadro-ventana albertiano.This paper offers a reading of the renaissance painting according to the principles established by Leon Battista Alberti, one of the first theorists of perspective in painting which Trattato della pittura define the frame of the painting as “an open window into history”. The concept of history employed by Alberti, which lends itself to many interpretations, is approached from the reflections of Erwin Panofsky about the prospect as “symbolic form”, moving towards a hypothesis about the symbolic nature of the configuration and representation of time in the alberti’s window. (shrink)

On the basis of the archival materials, first identified by the authors, and the published historical sources that have not yet come to the attention of historians of science, this article reconstructs the biography of Johann Christian Weltzien (1767–1829), doctor of medicine and surgery. In 1785, Weltzien became a court physician. In 1799, in the retinue of Grand Duke Konstantin Pavlovich, he participated in Italian and Swiss military campaigns. After that, Weltzien was assigned to the Сourt of Grand Duke Konstantin (...) Pavlovich of Russia and stayed at his court until 1810. He started his charitable activities in the Medico-Philanthropic Committee. From May 1810 to the middle of 1825, Weltzien was a physician at the Imperial Page Corps. It turned out that around the same time, in 1804–1825, he was a member of the Medical Council. Furthermore, as there were two medical councils under two ministries at the time, in 1811–1822, he was a member of both. Since 1825, Weltzien lived on his estate in Somel, now Vaiatu Manor in Estonia, and died in St. Petersburg. Weltzien’s work as a provincial physician prompted him to write a book on medical police, which was published in 1785. It has been established that this remained his only book on the topic. The article shows that Weltzien became one of the first ideologists of state care for public health in the Russian Empire. Weltzien’s ideas, expressed over 200 years ago, regarding the state having mechanisms to impact public health and the importance of not excluding it from solving health problems have not lost their significance even today. (shrink)

El artículo examina el conflicto formal que se produce en la descripción de Odradek al interior de “La preocupación del padre de familia” de Franz Kafka. En la voz de su narrador, Kafka se vale de un lenguaje de extraordinaria precisión para describir a su criatura (Odradek), produciendo una serie de paradojas. Prestamos atención seria a estas paradojas, mostrando las consecuencias que ellas plantean para los conceptos de “historia” en Kant y Benjamin, en sus respectivas relaciones con el concepto (...) de “naturaleza” en estos autores. (shrink)

En el presente artículo se pretende realizar un análisis en términos prospectivos de las principales claves e interrogantes suscitados a propósito de una de las más enigmáticas fases de la historia de la filosofía clásica: la génesis de la moral cristiana pos-evangélica, en donde pueden hallarse vínculos indisolubles en la tradición iusnaturalista greco-romana.

Este artículo investiga, en cuanto hilo conductor, las transformaciones de la noción de éschaton en la apocalíptica judía y cristiana desde el punto de la vista de la teología de la técnica, además de su tránsito a la filosofía de la tecnología de Günther Anders. El propósito de ello es mostrar cómo, con excepciones y variaciones, la relación entre escatología y apocalipsis se desactiva doblemente, tanto en el cristianismo como en la modernidad tecnológica, para continuar como un hiato que hereda (...) de manera compleja y utópica, y ya por completo secularizado, el programa transhumanista del mejoramiento tecnológico de la biología humana. (shrink)

The problem of exclusion threatens non-reductive physicalist theories of the mind by implying that they cannot account for mental causation. This paper attempts to clarify what exactly the exclusion problem is, and, given the problem, to survey the theoretical options open. First I reconstruct the problem from its most influential sources (Malcolm and Kim), showing that it should be understood as an ontological rather than an explanatory problem. I then distinguish the problem from some consequences that seem to follow from (...) it. Finally I sketch a map of possible answers to exclusion. (shrink)

Few major philosophers show evidence of having studied the works of their predecessors with special care, even in cases where they were subject to particular influences which they were ready to acknowledge. Hume knew that he was working in the tradition of ‘some late philosophers in England, who have begun to put the science of man on a new footing’—‘Mr Locke, my Lord Shaftsbury, Dr Mandeville, Mr Hutchinson, Dr Butler, &c.’ But there is not much sign in the Treatise or (...) elsewhere in Hume's writings of any close acquaintance with the works of these authors; the presumption must be that he had read them at some time and extracted the main ideas, but was not in the habit of returning to their texts. He had something more important to do, namely to work at philosophical problems of his own. Similarly Kant, though he said that the Critique of Pure Reason was not meant to be ‘a critique of books and systems, but of the faculty of reason in general’, had clearly felt the impact of the thought of some important past philosophers, but equally had never spent much time in finding out just what these philosophers had to say. Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Locke, Leibniz and Hume all get fairly frequent mention in his pages. But Kant takes his knowledge of Plato and Aristotle from J. J. Brucker's Historia critica philosophiae, a six-volume compilation which first appeared in 1742, or from doubtful sources such as Mendelssohn's doctored translation of the Phaedo, and though he doubtless knew the more recent authors at first hand clearly felt no need to study them in any depth. This was true even of writers to whom he attributed a particular importance, such as Leibniz and Hume. The references to Hume in the Critique and Prolegomena are all disappointingly general, and though the summary of Leibniz's philosophy in the section called ‘The Amphiboly of Concepts of Reflection’ has a certain force, it is not documented with references to Leibnizian texts. Kant knows that there is a difference between the views of the historical Leibniz and those which constituted the ‘Leibnizian-Wolffian system’ of his successors. But he is not very curious about the difference, or inclined to explore it. (shrink)

The disappearance of the imperial biographies written by Marius Maximus is one of the more frustrating losses of Latin literature, for various reasons: the well-known testimony of Ammianus, the interest of Marius Maximus' attested contribution to the Historia Augusta, his importance, much in dispute, to the writer of that work, the lack of information on much of the period he covered, and, not least, the fascinating role assigned to him by modern scholars, remodelling a previous duality of sources, of (...) bad biographer in contrast to the good Ignotus. It has recently become common practice for the evidence of Ausonius' Caesares to be used in the search for this biographer. The suggestion goes back to a dissertation of F. della Corte in 1956/7, and was taken up in his edition of Ausonius' works by Pastorino, and discussed in the following year by Cazzaniga who, though uncertain about the dependence of Ausonius on Marius Maximus, does misleadingly assert ‘e certo che l'ultima epigramma tocca Elagabalo, che chiude la silloge’. More recently, della Corte has returned to the question and sketched a possible model for the growth of the whole extant collection of Ausonius' Caesares, on the basis of the manuscript tradition. The same volume contains a contribution to the question by S. d'Elia and includes, by a felicitous piece of editing, an extended footnote in which d'Elia is able to comment on the relevant part of della Corte's paper. Meanwhile, outside Italy, there have been parallel and independent developments. (shrink)

Hilbert’s unpublished 1917 lectures on logic, analyzed here, are the beginning of modern metalogic. In them he proved the consistency and Post-completeness (maximal consistency) of propositional logic -results traditionally credited to Bernays (1918) and Post (1921). These lectures contain the first formal treatment of first-order logic and form the core of Hilbert’s famous 1928 book with Ackermann. What Bernays, influenced by those lectures, did in 1918 was to change the emphasis from the consistency and Post-completeness of a logic to its (...) soundness and completeness: a sentence is provable if and only if valid. By 1917, strongly influenced by PM, Hilbert accepted the theory of types and logicism -a surprising shift. But by 1922 he abandoned the axiom of reducibility and then drew back from logicism, returning to his 1905 approach of trying to prove the consistency of number theory syntactically. (shrink)