• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >JEAN BURIDAN ON THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE SCIENCES (TERMINISM, NOMINALISM, LOGIC).
【24h】

JEAN BURIDAN ON THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE SCIENCES (TERMINISM, NOMINALISM, LOGIC).

机译：简·布丹丹（JEAN BURIDAN）论科学的分类（术语，名词，逻辑）。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Since antiquity, educators and philosophers have been interested in the classifications of the arts and sciences. The three major classificatory traditions of antiquity (Stoic, Boethian-Aristotelian, and the Seven Liberal Arts) were adopted, combined and modified by the medieval classifiers.;The late medieval classifiers were concerned primarily with the philosophical principles of classification. Aristotle's writings, recovered in the twelfth century, posed many questions for the medieval classifiers. A major problem was to find the proper means to unify a science and to distinguish it from others. The logical method of terminism and the nominalist philosophy posed deep difficulties for the resolution of this issue. Some fourteenth century nominalists, among them William of Ockham, saw the Aristotelian method of division by formal subjects as no more than a convenience, lacking objective validity.;Jean Buridan, the Parisian Master of Arts and prominent nominalist, objected to the Ockhamist critique of the Aristotelian division. Desiring to save the Philosopher's doctrine, he proposed a solution based upon terminist principles and compatible with nominalism. Each science, which he regarded as a collection of propositions, was unified by a single "subject of attribution," to which every subject and predicate term used in the science reduced in some way. In this dissertation I explain Buridan's solution and argue that, despite its shortcomings, it is probably the best nominalist resolution of the difficulty. I conclude by showing how Buridan incorporates much of the earlier classificatory doctrine into his scheme of the sciences.;Students of the history of the classification of the sciences have tended to ignore the later middle ages. Some have suggested that the schoolmen of the fourteenth century were not interested in the problem. I have shown that the discussion continued into the fourteenth century and that its fundamental character did not change from the thirteenth century.
机译：自古以来，教育者和哲学家就对艺术和科学的分类感兴趣。中世纪的分类者采用，结合并修改了上古的三种主要分类传统（斯多葛，波西斯-亚里斯多德主义和七种自由艺术）。晚期的中世纪分类器主要关注分类的哲学原理。亚里斯多德的著作在十二世纪得到恢复，这给中世纪的分类者提出了许多问题。一个主要的问题是找到适当的方法来统一一门科学并将其与其他科学区分开。术语主义的逻辑方法和唯名论的哲学给解决这个问题带来了很大的困难。约十四世纪的唯名主义者，其中包括奥克姆威廉（William of Ockham），认为亚里士多德将形式主体划分的方法仅是一种便利，缺乏客观的效度。亚里士多德分部。为了挽救哲学家的学说，他提出了一个基于术语主义原理并与唯名主义兼容的解决方案。他认为每门科学都是命题的集合，由一个“归因主体”统一起来，科学中使用的每个主题和谓词都以某种方式减少了归因。在本文中，我解释了Buridan的解决方案，并指出，尽管存在缺点，但它可能是难度最大的唯名论解决方案。最后，我向您展示了Buridan如何将许多早期的分类学说纳入他的科学计划中。；科学分类历史的学生往往忽略了后来的中世纪。有些人认为十四世纪的学生对这个问题不感兴趣。我已经表明，讨论一直持续到14世纪，其基本特征自13世纪以来没有改变。

著录项

  • 作者

    DAY, CAROL A.;

  • 作者单位

    Indiana University.;

  • 授予单位 Indiana University.;
  • 学科 History of Science.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1986
  • 页码 334 p.
  • 总页数 334
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号