| Title | Aspects of Avicenna |
| Type | Edited Book |
| Language | undefined |
| Date | 2001 |
| Publication Place | Princeton |
| Publisher | Markus Wiener Publishers |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | |
| Editor(s) | Wisnovsky, Robert |
| Translator(s) |
| The articles in this volume aim to further our understanding of the work and thought of the philosopher and physician Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥusain ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sīnā (born before 370 AH/980 CE-died 428 AH/1037 CE), known in the West by his Latinized name Avicenna. It seems to me that what much of the best new schlorahip has in common, and what the articles in this volume aspire to, is a mature and subtle appreciation of the history of Avicenna’s philosophy. By this I mean two things. First, the increasing availability of edited Avicennian texts has allowed scholars to examine a broader spectrum of passages about particular topic than they were able to in the past. This, in turn, has made possible the recent and ongoing attempts to periodize Avicenna’s philosophical career through the careful dating of individual work. Scholars now have to come to terms with the fact that there may not be a single Avicennian position on a given issue, but rather a history of positions, adopted at different periods of his life. Second, many of the ancient commentaries on Aristotle, though available in the original Greek for a hundred years now, have only recently been translated into English. These translations, along with the new scholarly work on the commentators which has followed in their wake, have made a massive but heretofore forbidden resource for the history of late-antique and early-medieval philosophy easily accessible to speciallists in Arabic philosophy. The more precisely we understand how Greek philosophy developed durig the period between 200 CE and 600 CE, the better able we shall be to situate the theories of philosophers such as Avicenny in their intellectual-historical context. [introduction/conclusion] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wL5bMZgjyTXYzBp |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1452","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1452,"authors_free":[{"id":2450,"entry_id":1452,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":483,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","free_first_name":"Robert","free_last_name":"Wisnovsky","norm_person":{"id":483,"first_name":"Robert","last_name":"Wisnovsky","full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aspects of Avicenna","main_title":{"title":"Aspects of Avicenna"},"abstract":"The articles in this volume aim to further our understanding of the work and thought of the philosopher and physician Ab\u016b \u02bfAl\u012b al-\u1e24usain ibn \u02bfAbd All\u0101h ibn S\u012bn\u0101 (born before 370 AH\/980 CE-died 428 AH\/1037 CE), known in the West by his Latinized name Avicenna. \r\nIt seems to me that what much of the best new schlorahip has in common, and what the articles in this volume aspire to, is a mature and subtle appreciation of the history of Avicenna\u2019s philosophy. By this I mean two things. First, the increasing availability of edited Avicennian texts has allowed scholars to examine a broader spectrum of passages about particular topic than they were able to in the past. This, in turn, has made possible the recent and ongoing attempts to periodize Avicenna\u2019s philosophical career through the careful dating of individual work. Scholars now have to come to terms with the fact that there may not be a single Avicennian position on a given issue, but rather a history of positions, adopted at different periods of his life. \r\nSecond, many of the ancient commentaries on Aristotle, though available in the original Greek for a hundred years now, have only recently been translated into English. These translations, along with the new scholarly work on the commentators which has followed in their wake, have made a massive but heretofore forbidden resource for the history of late-antique and early-medieval philosophy easily accessible to speciallists in Arabic philosophy. The more precisely we understand how Greek philosophy developed durig the period between 200 CE and 600 CE, the better able we shall be to situate the theories of philosophers such as Avicenny in their intellectual-historical context. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":4,"date":"2001","language":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wL5bMZgjyTXYzBp","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":483,"full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":1452,"pubplace":"Princeton","publisher":"Markus Wiener Publishers","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2001]}
| Title | Simplicius and Avicenna on the Essential Corporeity of Material Substance |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2001 |
| Published in | Aspects of Avicenna |
| Pages | 73-130 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Stone, Abraham D. |
| Editor(s) | Wisnovsky, Robert |
| Translator(s) |
| Abraham Stone weighs Avicenna's ideas about what it is to be a body against those of the Neoplatonic Aristotle-commentator Simplicius. Stone is primarily interested in how Avicenna and Simplicius treat the problem of how the terms "corporeal" and "material" are related. Both corporeity and materiality appear to be essential characteristics of natural substances, the subject of natural philosophy. Are corporeity and materiality ultimately the same thing, then? Or is there some way to distinguish them? Stone argues that Simplicius holds corporeity and materiality to be identical, while Avicenna holds corporeity to be a quasi-formal characteristic and thus different from materiality. Although Simplicius' and Avicenna's solutions to this problem differ, Stone finds that they share a tendency to treat issues such as this - originally a problem of natural philosophy - as a part of the domain of metaphysics. By creating new metaphysical concepts ("corporeal form" is a good example) and carving new metaphysical distinctions, the two philosophers were trying to create deeper and deeper foundations of consistency on which their philsophical systems could rest. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/XMLo1YgrBvyYuSI |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1425","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1425,"authors_free":[{"id":2236,"entry_id":1425,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":409,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Stone, Abraham D.","free_first_name":" Abraham D.","free_last_name":"Stone","norm_person":{"id":409,"first_name":" Abraham D.","last_name":"Stone","full_name":"Stone, Abraham D.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2449,"entry_id":1425,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":483,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","free_first_name":"Robert","free_last_name":"Wisnovsky","norm_person":{"id":483,"first_name":"Robert","last_name":"Wisnovsky","full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius and Avicenna on the Essential Corporeity of Material Substance","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius and Avicenna on the Essential Corporeity of Material Substance"},"abstract":"Abraham Stone weighs Avicenna's ideas about what it is to be a body against those of the Neoplatonic Aristotle-commentator Simplicius. Stone is primarily interested in how Avicenna and Simplicius treat the problem of how the terms \"corporeal\" and \"material\" are related. Both corporeity and materiality appear to be essential characteristics of natural substances, the subject of natural philosophy. Are corporeity and materiality ultimately the same thing, then? Or is there some way to distinguish them? Stone argues that Simplicius holds corporeity and materiality to be identical, while Avicenna holds corporeity to be a quasi-formal characteristic and thus different from materiality. Although Simplicius' and Avicenna's solutions to this problem differ, Stone finds that they share a tendency to treat issues such as this - originally a problem of natural philosophy - as a part of the domain of metaphysics. By creating new metaphysical concepts (\"corporeal form\" is a good example) and carving new metaphysical distinctions, the two philosophers were trying to create deeper and deeper foundations of consistency on which their philsophical systems could rest. ","btype":2,"date":"2001","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/XMLo1YgrBvyYuSI","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":409,"full_name":"Stone, Abraham D.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":483,"full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1425,"section_of":1452,"pages":"73-130","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1452,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aspects of Avicenna","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2001","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"The articles in this volume aim to further our understanding of the work and thought of the philosopher and physician Ab\u016b \u02bfAl\u012b al-\u1e24usain ibn \u02bfAbd All\u0101h ibn S\u012bn\u0101 (born before 370 AH\/980 CE-died 428 AH\/1037 CE), known in the West by his Latinized name Avicenna. \r\nIt seems to me that what much of the best new schlorahip has in common, and what the articles in this volume aspire to, is a mature and subtle appreciation of the history of Avicenna\u2019s philosophy. By this I mean two things. First, the increasing availability of edited Avicennian texts has allowed scholars to examine a broader spectrum of passages about particular topic than they were able to in the past. This, in turn, has made possible the recent and ongoing attempts to periodize Avicenna\u2019s philosophical career through the careful dating of individual work. Scholars now have to come to terms with the fact that there may not be a single Avicennian position on a given issue, but rather a history of positions, adopted at different periods of his life. \r\nSecond, many of the ancient commentaries on Aristotle, though available in the original Greek for a hundred years now, have only recently been translated into English. These translations, along with the new scholarly work on the commentators which has followed in their wake, have made a massive but heretofore forbidden resource for the history of late-antique and early-medieval philosophy easily accessible to speciallists in Arabic philosophy. The more precisely we understand how Greek philosophy developed durig the period between 200 CE and 600 CE, the better able we shall be to situate the theories of philosophers such as Avicenny in their intellectual-historical context. [introduction\/conclusion]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wL5bMZgjyTXYzBp","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1452,"pubplace":"Princeton","publisher":"Markus Wiener Publishers","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":{"id":1425,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Princeton papers, interdisciplinary journal of Middle Eastern studies","volume":"9","issue":"","pages":"73-130"}},"sort":[2001]}
| Title | Aspects of Avicenna |
| Type | Edited Book |
| Language | undefined |
| Date | 2001 |
| Publication Place | Princeton |
| Publisher | Markus Wiener Publishers |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | |
| Editor(s) | Wisnovsky, Robert |
| Translator(s) |
The articles in this volume aim to further our understanding of the work and thought of the philosopher and physician Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥusain ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sīnā (born before 370 AH/980 CE-died 428 AH/1037 CE), known in the West by his Latinized name Avicenna. It seems to me that what much of the best new schlorahip has in common, and what the articles in this volume aspire to, is a mature and subtle appreciation of the history of Avicenna’s philosophy. By this I mean two things. First, the increasing availability of edited Avicennian texts has allowed scholars to examine a broader spectrum of passages about particular topic than they were able to in the past. This, in turn, has made possible the recent and ongoing attempts to periodize Avicenna’s philosophical career through the careful dating of individual work. Scholars now have to come to terms with the fact that there may not be a single Avicennian position on a given issue, but rather a history of positions, adopted at different periods of his life. Second, many of the ancient commentaries on Aristotle, though available in the original Greek for a hundred years now, have only recently been translated into English. These translations, along with the new scholarly work on the commentators which has followed in their wake, have made a massive but heretofore forbidden resource for the history of late-antique and early-medieval philosophy easily accessible to speciallists in Arabic philosophy. The more precisely we understand how Greek philosophy developed durig the period between 200 CE and 600 CE, the better able we shall be to situate the theories of philosophers such as Avicenny in their intellectual-historical context. [introduction/conclusion] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wL5bMZgjyTXYzBp |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1452","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1452,"authors_free":[{"id":2450,"entry_id":1452,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":483,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","free_first_name":"Robert","free_last_name":"Wisnovsky","norm_person":{"id":483,"first_name":"Robert","last_name":"Wisnovsky","full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aspects of Avicenna","main_title":{"title":"Aspects of Avicenna"},"abstract":"The articles in this volume aim to further our understanding of the work and thought of the philosopher and physician Ab\u016b \u02bfAl\u012b al-\u1e24usain ibn \u02bfAbd All\u0101h ibn S\u012bn\u0101 (born before 370 AH\/980 CE-died 428 AH\/1037 CE), known in the West by his Latinized name Avicenna. \r\nIt seems to me that what much of the best new schlorahip has in common, and what the articles in this volume aspire to, is a mature and subtle appreciation of the history of Avicenna\u2019s philosophy. By this I mean two things. First, the increasing availability of edited Avicennian texts has allowed scholars to examine a broader spectrum of passages about particular topic than they were able to in the past. This, in turn, has made possible the recent and ongoing attempts to periodize Avicenna\u2019s philosophical career through the careful dating of individual work. Scholars now have to come to terms with the fact that there may not be a single Avicennian position on a given issue, but rather a history of positions, adopted at different periods of his life. \r\nSecond, many of the ancient commentaries on Aristotle, though available in the original Greek for a hundred years now, have only recently been translated into English. These translations, along with the new scholarly work on the commentators which has followed in their wake, have made a massive but heretofore forbidden resource for the history of late-antique and early-medieval philosophy easily accessible to speciallists in Arabic philosophy. The more precisely we understand how Greek philosophy developed durig the period between 200 CE and 600 CE, the better able we shall be to situate the theories of philosophers such as Avicenny in their intellectual-historical context. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":4,"date":"2001","language":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wL5bMZgjyTXYzBp","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":483,"full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":1452,"pubplace":"Princeton","publisher":"Markus Wiener Publishers","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Aspects of Avicenna"]}
| Title | Simplicius and Avicenna on the Essential Corporeity of Material Substance |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2001 |
| Published in | Aspects of Avicenna |
| Pages | 73-130 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Stone, Abraham D. |
| Editor(s) | Wisnovsky, Robert |
| Translator(s) |
Abraham Stone weighs Avicenna's ideas about what it is to be a body against those of the Neoplatonic Aristotle-commentator Simplicius. Stone is primarily interested in how Avicenna and Simplicius treat the problem of how the terms "corporeal" and "material" are related. Both corporeity and materiality appear to be essential characteristics of natural substances, the subject of natural philosophy. Are corporeity and materiality ultimately the same thing, then? Or is there some way to distinguish them? Stone argues that Simplicius holds corporeity and materiality to be identical, while Avicenna holds corporeity to be a quasi-formal characteristic and thus different from materiality. Although Simplicius' and Avicenna's solutions to this problem differ, Stone finds that they share a tendency to treat issues such as this - originally a problem of natural philosophy - as a part of the domain of metaphysics. By creating new metaphysical concepts ("corporeal form" is a good example) and carving new metaphysical distinctions, the two philosophers were trying to create deeper and deeper foundations of consistency on which their philsophical systems could rest. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/XMLo1YgrBvyYuSI |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1425","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1425,"authors_free":[{"id":2236,"entry_id":1425,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":409,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Stone, Abraham D.","free_first_name":" Abraham D.","free_last_name":"Stone","norm_person":{"id":409,"first_name":" Abraham D.","last_name":"Stone","full_name":"Stone, Abraham D.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2449,"entry_id":1425,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":483,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","free_first_name":"Robert","free_last_name":"Wisnovsky","norm_person":{"id":483,"first_name":"Robert","last_name":"Wisnovsky","full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius and Avicenna on the Essential Corporeity of Material Substance","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius and Avicenna on the Essential Corporeity of Material Substance"},"abstract":"Abraham Stone weighs Avicenna's ideas about what it is to be a body against those of the Neoplatonic Aristotle-commentator Simplicius. Stone is primarily interested in how Avicenna and Simplicius treat the problem of how the terms \"corporeal\" and \"material\" are related. Both corporeity and materiality appear to be essential characteristics of natural substances, the subject of natural philosophy. Are corporeity and materiality ultimately the same thing, then? Or is there some way to distinguish them? Stone argues that Simplicius holds corporeity and materiality to be identical, while Avicenna holds corporeity to be a quasi-formal characteristic and thus different from materiality. Although Simplicius' and Avicenna's solutions to this problem differ, Stone finds that they share a tendency to treat issues such as this - originally a problem of natural philosophy - as a part of the domain of metaphysics. By creating new metaphysical concepts (\"corporeal form\" is a good example) and carving new metaphysical distinctions, the two philosophers were trying to create deeper and deeper foundations of consistency on which their philsophical systems could rest. ","btype":2,"date":"2001","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/XMLo1YgrBvyYuSI","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":409,"full_name":"Stone, Abraham D.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":483,"full_name":"Wisnovsky, Robert","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1425,"section_of":1452,"pages":"73-130","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1452,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aspects of Avicenna","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2001","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"The articles in this volume aim to further our understanding of the work and thought of the philosopher and physician Ab\u016b \u02bfAl\u012b al-\u1e24usain ibn \u02bfAbd All\u0101h ibn S\u012bn\u0101 (born before 370 AH\/980 CE-died 428 AH\/1037 CE), known in the West by his Latinized name Avicenna. \r\nIt seems to me that what much of the best new schlorahip has in common, and what the articles in this volume aspire to, is a mature and subtle appreciation of the history of Avicenna\u2019s philosophy. By this I mean two things. First, the increasing availability of edited Avicennian texts has allowed scholars to examine a broader spectrum of passages about particular topic than they were able to in the past. This, in turn, has made possible the recent and ongoing attempts to periodize Avicenna\u2019s philosophical career through the careful dating of individual work. Scholars now have to come to terms with the fact that there may not be a single Avicennian position on a given issue, but rather a history of positions, adopted at different periods of his life. \r\nSecond, many of the ancient commentaries on Aristotle, though available in the original Greek for a hundred years now, have only recently been translated into English. These translations, along with the new scholarly work on the commentators which has followed in their wake, have made a massive but heretofore forbidden resource for the history of late-antique and early-medieval philosophy easily accessible to speciallists in Arabic philosophy. The more precisely we understand how Greek philosophy developed durig the period between 200 CE and 600 CE, the better able we shall be to situate the theories of philosophers such as Avicenny in their intellectual-historical context. [introduction\/conclusion]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wL5bMZgjyTXYzBp","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1452,"pubplace":"Princeton","publisher":"Markus Wiener Publishers","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":{"id":1425,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Princeton papers, interdisciplinary journal of Middle Eastern studies","volume":"9","issue":"","pages":"73-130"}},"sort":["Simplicius and Avicenna on the Essential Corporeity of Material Substance"]}