O presente artigo oferece-nos um panorama das posições de alguns dos mais importantes filósofos do século XIII acerca da existência no ser humano do intelecto agente. A posição aristotélica, purificada e transformada, encontra-se distintamente presente em três filósofos: Pedro Hispano, Santo Alberto Magno, S. Tomás de Aquino. A tese mais importante comum a estes três pensadores é a de que Deus constitui o objecto do intellectus agens. /// This article reviews statements of relevant philosophers of the XIIIth century supporting the (...) existence of agent intellect in the human being. Three philosophers can be distinguished in the purified and advanced aristotelism: Peter of Spain, Saint Albertus Magnus, Saint Thomas Aquinas. Their common and capital thesis is that the object of the intellectus agens is God. (shrink)

Die Autographe Alberts des Grossen, von H. Ostlender.--Das Uppsalenser Albertusautograph, von F. Stegmüller.--Albertus-Magnus-Fragmente in Schweden, von T. Schmid.--Das zeitliche Verhältnis der Summa de incarnatione zu dem dritten Buche des Sentenzenkommentars Alberts des Grossen, von I. Backes.--Der Geist als höherer Teil der Seele nach Albert dem Grossen, von A. J. Backes.--Bemerkungen zur Ehelehre des hl. Albertus Magnus, von H. Doms.--Die Behandlung der Tugend der Keuschheit im Schrifttum Alberts des Grossen, von C. Feckes.--Um die Quaestiones de animalibus Alberts des Grossen, (...) von E. Filthaut.--Principium Biblicum Alberti Magni, ed. A. Fries.--En marge de l'explication du "Credo" par Saint Albert le Grand, par J. de Ghellinck.--Zur Frage der anfangslosen und zeitlichen Schöpfung bei Albert dem Grossen, von J. Hansen.--Die ursprüngliche Einteilung des Sentenzenkommentars Alberts des Grossen, von A. Hiedl. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Before Science: The Invention of the Friars’ Natural Philosophy by Roger French, Andrew CunninghamIrven M. ResnickRoger French and Andrew Cunningham. Before Science: The Invention of the Friars’ Natural Philosophy. Hants, UK: Scolar Press, 1996. Pp. x + 298. Cloth, $68.95.This is a peculiar book that depicts thirteenth-century natural philosophy as wholly dependent on the theological interests of the mendicant orders. For the Friars, “Natural philosophy was a study (...) in which the central concerns were the detection, admiration and appreciation of God’s existence, goodness, providence, munificence, forethought and provision for His creation” (4). Although conceived as “a positive contribution to the discipline of the history of science” (3), the work begins and ends with the claim that medieval natural philosophers were not engaged in science.One difficulty is that the authors never make clear what they mean by science, although they evidently understand that it entails a repudiation of metaphysics and a doctrine of nature’s radical autonomy. Consequently, for French and Cunningham medieval “science” is a mythic construct of modern historians, since “[t]here was no scientific tradition (in the modern sense of the term ‘scientific’) of looking at nature in the thirteenth century, only a religio-political way of doing so” (273).Thus, when summarizing the accomplishments of Roger Bacon, they note that “[Bacon] has been credited, along with Grosseteste, with creating early ‘experimental science’. Bacon could not of course have been a ‘scientist’ because he lived in the wrong [End Page 623] age for this” (238). This seemingly casual conclusion is rather stunning not only in its own right, but also as a revelation of the authors’ own effort to disenfranchise medieval ‘scientists’ for having had the misfortune of living too soon.French and Cunningham propose that polemical or apologetical interests urged the Friars to study nature as a response to various heretics and especially the Cathars who, seemingly like moderns, sought to disengage the natural world from the Christian God, while using the vocabulary of Aristotle’s libri naturales. However this central argument demands better support. Since the authors can cite only one surviving Cathar text—De duobus principiis (ca. 1230)—almost everything known of this group is derived from anti-Cathar polemics. Based on this single text the authors can say no more than that it used “what looks very much like a commentary on Aristotle’s Physics or Metaphysics,” (134) but fail to identify more precisely its sources. It is clear that thirteenth-century orthodox polemics increasingly relied on Aristotelian materials, but the conclusion that natural philosophers did so only in response to heretics who beat them to the Aristotelian punch seems tendentious. The historian will likely remain unconvinced that the unparalleled translating activity of the late eleventh and twelfth centuries—the rendering into Latin of Arabic scientific knowledge (as in Constantine the African’s Pantegni or Adelard of Bath’s Quaestiones naturales), Greek medical literature (e.g. Galen’s Methodus medendi translated by Gerard of Cremona and Burgundio of Pisa) and mathematics (e.g. Euclid’s Optics, Theodosius’s Spherics, Archimedes’ On the Quadrature of the Circle, and Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos and Almagest) culminating with thirteenth-century translations of Aristotle’s biological works—should all have stemmed from a preoccupation with heresy.A further shortcoming of this book is the limited attention given to works on natural philosophy by the Friars themselves. The book’s first seven of eleven chapters explore the educational establishments in which natural philosophy arose: first monastic and cathedral schools, and then the universities. The works of individual Friars receive only the briefest summary. Among the Dominican natural philosophers Albertus Magnus—the patron saint of scientists and one of a very few scholastics to have commented on all of Aristotle’s biological works—is awarded only five pages. For his mastery of Aristotle’s libri naturales Albertus has been called “the dominant figure in Latin learning and natural science of the thirteenth century.” (Cf. Lynn Thorndike, History of Magic and Experimental Science [New York: Macmillan, 1929], 2:521) Albertus described not only the natural world but also explored the philosophical foundations for scientific knowledge. Yet curiously French and Cunningham give much more attention... (shrink)

Diese Ausgabe bietet erstmals den vollständigen lateinischen Text des ersten Buches des Kommentars zum Liber de causis in kritischer Edition mit deutscher Übersetzung. Sie entstand als ein Gemeinschaftswerk aller Editoren und Mitarbeiter an der in Progreß befindlichen Editio Coloniensis, der kritischen Gesamtausgabe der Alberti Magni Opera Omnia. Albertus Magnus - der Beiname "der Große" ist seit dem 14. Jahrhundert belegt, nachdem ihm schon die Zeitgenossen den Ehrentitel "doctor universalis" verliehen hatten - wird in den Annalen der Philosophiegeschichte zwar stets (...) respektvoll genannt; aber der Schatten seines großen Schülers, Thomas von Aquin, legte sich lange Zeit so sehr über sein Werk, daß die herausragende Stellung, die Albert für die Grundlegung und Ausgestaltung der Metaphysik in der Philosophie des Mittelalters einnimmt, erst neuerlich wieder in das Zentrum der Forschung gerückt ist. (shrink)

Homosexuality is not easily accepted in the Catholic Church. There are at least three major schools concerning the attitude towards homosexuality based on their respective theological methodologies (scientia fidei). The first school is encapsulated in the Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons (1986), which rejects homosexual persons and same-sex sexual relationships. The second school is put forward by John J. McNeill (1993), a moralist who embraces homosexual persons and same-sex sexual relationships. (...) The last one is represented by the document of Amoris Laetitia (2016), which accepts homosexual persons but disapproves of same-sex sexual relationships. These three major schools refer to the interpretation of the document Persona Humana article 8 (1975). A survey of 566 respondents was conducted from the 8th to the 15th of November in 2022. The results show that 74.2% of respondents have a form of acceptance in accordance with Amoris Laetitia, 14.5% with the Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, and 5.5% with the thoughts of John J. McNeill. Our study concluded that accepting homosexual persons and rejecting homosexual acts is the reference for ad experimentum moral decisions in the context of the Archdiocese of Jakarta in 2022. Abstrak Homoseksualitas tidak begitu mudah diterima dalam Gereja Katolik. Setidaknya ada tiga aliran yang berbeda sikap terhadap homoseksualitas berdasarkan pandangan teologi (scientia fidei) masing-masing. Aliran pertama terwakili oleh dokumen Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons (1986) yang menolak pribadi homoseksual dan hubungan seksual sesama jenis. Aliran kedua diwakili oleh seorang moralis bernama John J. McNeill (1993) yang menerima pribadi homoseksual dan hubungan seksual sesama jenis. Aliran ketiga terwakili oleh dokumen Amoris Laetitia (2016) yang menerima pribadi homoseksual namun menolak hubungan seksual sesama jenis. Ketiga aliran besar ini mengacu pada penafsiran dokumen Persona Humana artikel 8 (1975). Sejak tanggal 8 sampai dengan 15 November 2022 kami melakukan survei terhadap 566 responden. Hasil survei menunjukkan sebanyak 74.2% responden memiliki bentuk penerimaan sesuai dengan Amoris Laetitia; sebanyak 14.5% responden memiliki bentuk penerimaan sesuai dengan dokumen Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons; dan sebanyak 5.5% responden memiliki bentuk penerimaan sesuai dengan pemikiran John J. McNeill. Kami menyimpulkan bahwa sikap menerima pribadi homoseksual dan menolak tindakan homoseksual merupakan rujukan keputusan moral ad experimentum dalam konteks Keuskupan Agung Jakarta di tahun 2022. Kata-kata Kunci: Homoseksualitas, Persona Humana, Amoris Laetitia, John J. McNeill, sensus fidei, scientia fidei. (shrink)

In their struggle against the capitalist colonization of desire, Christianity and Buddhism offer similar strategies of fundamental formation or transformation of human desire. This article examines three specific features in which Christianity and Buddhism share a broad and deep resemblance in their analysis of on the dynamics of human desire and its transformation. First, both traditions identify distorted human desire as a source of bondage (or suffering), which affects the mind (intellectual), the heart (affective) and the body. Second, in terms (...) of the strategy of liberation from this bondage, both agree that human desiring constitutes the most effective internal force available in the human make up itself. Thus, the liberation process is not aimed at wiping out human desire but rather at channeling the very power of human desiring through a process of education whose dynamics are understood as an ascent or a journey that leads to higher (or deeper) Reality. Third, with regard to the direction of liberation, both traditions assert that this process should be directed not only toward the self but also towards others. Here the benefit for others, the virtue of caritas in Christianity and bodhicitta in Buddhism, constitutes a fundamental part of the direction of this process of formation. Keywords: Christianity, Buddhism, desire, capitalism, bondage,transformation, caritas, bodhicitta. Abstrak: Dalam perlawanan mereka terhadap kolonisasi hasrat oleh kapitalisme, tradisi Budhis dan Kristiani menawarkan cara-cara yang mirip untuk mendidik atau mentransformasi hasrat manusia. Artikel ini membahas tiga unsur penting yang sama dari analisis Budhisme dan Kristianitas mengenai dinamika hasrat manusia dan transformasinya. Pertama, kedua tradisi ini mengidentifikasi hasrat manusia yang rusak atau salah arah sebagai sebab dasariah dari penderitaan manusia. Kerusakan hasrat ini juga mempengaruhi dimensi intelektual, afektif dan juga tubuh manusia. Kedua, perihal cara pembebasan dari penderitaan ini, kedua tradisi ini juga sepakat bahwa hasrat manusia merupakan dayainternal paling efektif dalam diri manusia sendiri. Karena itu, proses pembebasan ini tidak dimaksudkan untuk membuang hasrat dari kemanusiaan, melainkan untuk menyalurkan daya hasrat ini melalui proses transformasi yang berdinamika “mendaki,” sebuah perjalanan menuju Realitas yang lebih tinggi atau dalam. Ketiga, mengenai arah pembebasan ini, kedua tradisi menekankan bahwa proses ini ditujukan tidak hanya untuk diri sendiri melainkan juga sesama. Dalam hal ini, kepentingan sesama seperti diungkapkan oleh keutamaan caritas dalam Kristianitas dan bodhicitta dalam Budhisme merupakan bagian dasariah dari arah transformasi hasrat manusia itu sendiri. Kata-kata kunci: Kristianitas, Budhisme, hasrat, kapitalisme, penderitaan, transformasi, caritas, bodhicitta. (shrink)

The survival and significance of the Latin American liberation theology movement relies, to some extent, on the power of the narratives of martyrdom. Precisely by relying on these narratives, through the dynamics of the theological category of memory that leads to solidarity, liberation theology situates itself in the tension between modernity and postmodernity. The categories of narrative, memory and solidarity, which are at play in the whole dynamic of martyrdom, constitute a postmodern way of doing a modern liberation theology. Liberation (...) theology will only be able to retain its “liberative” and “theological” element insofar as it continues to be “modern” and “postmodern” at the same time. Against the postmodern disbelief in the possibility of human emancipation, liberation theology continues to labor precisely under principium liberationis grounded in the promise of liberation contained in God’s revelation in the Scriptures. However, against the “modern” conception of emancipation based on reason and governed by the idea of progress, liberation theology envisions liberation as an integral process which takes place in a concrete, particular historical reality and under the eschatological promise of God. Keywords: liberation theology, martyrdom, modern, postmodern, narrative, memory, solidarity. Abstrak: Relevansi dan pertumbuhan teologi pembebasan, sampai tingkat tertentu, juga bergantung pada kekuatan kisah kemartiran. Dengan mendasarkan diri pada kisah (narrative) yang diolah lewat kategori pengingatan (memory) yang mengarah pada solidaritas, teologi pembebasan menempatkan diri dalam tegangan antara modernitas dan posmodernitas. Kategori kisah, pengingatan, dan solidaritas, yang berada dalam jantung narasi kemartiran, mengetengahkan sebuah cara posmodern untuk melakukan teologi pembebasan yang modern. Teologi pembebasan hanya akan berhasil mempertahankan unsur “teologi” dan “pembebasan” sejauh bersifat modern dan posmodern pada saat yang sama. Melawan ketidakpercayaan posmodernitas terhadap kemungkinan proyek pembebasan, teologi pembebasan mempertahankan prinsip pembebasan atas dasar isi pewahyuan Allah dalam Kitab Suci. Akan tetapi, melawan pemahaman modern tentang pembebasan berdasarkan akalbudi dan kemajuan, teologi pembebasan memahami pembebasan sebagai sebuah proses integral yang terjadi dalam waktu dan tempat yang nyata, dalam realitas sejarah yang partikular dan dalam kerangka janji eskatologis Allah. Kata-kata kunci: teologi pembebasan, kemartiran, modern, posmodern, narasi, pengingatan, solidaritas. (shrink)

The strained relation between Samaritans and Jews as a fruit of long-term process from the division of the United Kingdom of Israel (ca. 931 B.C.E) became a dominant issue since the post-exilic period and became more pronounced in the first century C.E. Beside the Old Testament, the story of their relation which was full of conflict can be traced to extra-biblical sources. One of them is Flavius Josephus’ works (ca. 70 to 100 C.E), i.e., Jewish War and Jewish Antiquities. The (...) root of the conflict is related to the presence of the Second Jerusalem Temple. The peak of the conflict is the construction of the Mount Gerizim temple in which some Jews regarded the adherents of the Samaritan cult as schismatic. The founding of this rival temple of Jerusalem aggravated the bad relations between Samaritans and Jews. The destruction of the Mount Gerizim temple by John Hyrcanus was a crucial incident for their relations. The conflict between Samaritans and Jews still continued in the Roman period. By historical approach, this study would setforth the examination of some Josephus’ accounts regarding the historical process of the estrangement and rivalry between Samaritans and Jews which resulted in the final split in second century B.C.E. Keywords: Samaritans, Jews, Flavius Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, Temple, Jerusalem, Mount Gerizim. Abstrak: Relasi tegang antara orang Samaria dan Yahudi merupakan buah dari proses yang panjang sejak pecahnya Kerajaan Israel Raya (sekitar 931 B.C.E). Relasi mereka ini menjadi masalah dominan sejak periode setelah pembuangan dan semakin jelas pada abad pertama masehi. Di samping Perjanjian Lama, kisah tentang relasi mereka yang penuh konflik dapat dilacak dalam sumber-sumber di luar Alkitab. Salah satunya adalah karya dari Flavius Josephus (sekitar 70 sampai 100 M), yaitu Perang Yahudi dan Sejarah Yahudi. Akar dari konflik itu adalah kehadiran Bait Allah Yerusalem Kedua. Puncak dari konflik itu adalah pembangunan Bait Allah di Gunung Gerizim di mana sejumlah orang Yahudi kemudian menganggap pengikut ibadah orang Samaria sebagai skismatis. Pendirian tandingan Bait Allah Yerusalem ini memperparah relasi buruk antara Samaria dan Yahudi. Penghancuran Bait Allah di Gunung Gerizim oleh Yohanes Hyrcanus menjadi insiden krusial bagi relasi mereka. Konflik antara orang Samaria dan Yahudi masih terus berlangsung pada periode Romawi. Dengan pendekatan historis, studi ini akan memaparkan penelitian kisah-kisah dari karya Josephus berkaitan dengan proses perpecahan dan persaingan antara orang Samaria dan Yahudi memuncak pada perpecahannya pada abad II SM. Kata-kata Kunci: Samaria, Yahudi, Flavius Josephus, Sejarah Yahudi, Bait Allah, Yerusalem, Gunung Gerizim. (shrink)

This critical edition of Albert of Saxony's _25 Questions on Logic_ treats issues such as the imposition, distribution, signification, and supposition of terms, and the truth and falsity, conversion, contradictoriness and kinds of propositions, together with problems concerning negotiations.

For several centuries prior to the founding of the Theosophical Society in 1875, individual 'theosophers' in Britain and Europe were quietly in touch with one another all seekers of the inward way. Theosophic Correspondence (1792 1797) is a series of inspiring letters, personal and philosophic, exchanged during the climactic days of the French Revolution between Kirchberger, member of the Sovereign Council at Berne, Switzerland, and Saint-Martin, whom Kirchberger regarded as 'the most eminent writer . . . and most profound (...) of his age'. (shrink)

More and more organisations formulate a code of conduct in order to stimulate responsible behaviour among their members. Much time and energy is usually spent fixing the content of the code but many organisations get stuck in the challenge of implementing and maintaining the code. The code then turns into nothing else than the notorious "paper in the drawer", without achieving its aims. The challenge of implementation is to utilize the dynamics which have emerged from the formulation of the code. (...) This will support a continuous process of reflection on the central values and standards contained in the code. This paper presents an assessment method, based on the EFQM model, which intends to support this implementation process. (shrink)