Published 2013-11-28
Keywords
How to Cite
Downloads
Altmetrics
Citas
Abstract
According to Thomas Aquinas, Averroes's philosophy of mind is characterized by the doctrine of the «double subject», which is found in his Long Commentary on the De anima. As is well-known, Averroes asserts that the intelligibles in act or theoretical intelligibles may be said to have two subjects (duo subiecta): the material intellect and the image of the cogitative power, whose connection allows individual human beings to think. We try here to know if it is properly a “theory” produced by Averroes. By analyzing all the texts dealing with it, we both intend to justify the use of the term “subiectum” applied to the image and to show that the expression “duo subiecta”, equivocal from a lexical point of view, is totally clear from a conceptual one. The doctrine of the double subject is certainly a thesis of Averroes stemming from his latter stage of his philosophy and his new teaching on the material intellect, but it is not, contrary to the interpretation of his Latin opponents, the doctrine of the two “substrates”, which would put man in the second place of the intelligible in act.
References
- Aristóteles. (1989). De l’âme. Barbotin (trad.) Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
- ____ (1993). De anima, books II and III (with passages from book I). D. W. Hamlyn (trad.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Averroes. (1953). Averrois Cordubensis Commentarium Magnum in Aristotelis De Anima Libros. F. S. Crawford (ed.) Cambridge: Mediaeval Academy of America.
- ____ (1998). L’Intelligence et la Pensée. Grand Commentaire du ‘De anima’. Livre III. A. de Libera (trad.) Paris: GF-Flammarion.
- ____ (2001). La béatitude de l’âme. M. Geoffroy et C. Steel (eds. & trads.) Paris: Vrin.
- ____ (2002). Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s De Anima. A. L. Ivry (trans.) Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press.
- Black, D. (1993). Consciousness and Self-Knowledge in Aquinas’s Critique of Averroes’ Psychology. En Journal of the History of Philosophy, 31.
- Blaustein, M. (1985). Averroes on the Imagination and on the Intellect. Ph.D. thesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Brenet, J. B. (2003a). Transferts du sujet. La noétique d’Averroès selon Jean de Jandun. Paris: Vrin.
- ____ (2003b). Y a-t-il un sujet de la pensée au Moyen Âge? En Oriens-Occidens. Sciences, mathématiques et philosophie à l’âge classique, 4: 109-169.
- Davidson, H. (1986). Averroes on the material intellect. En Viator, 17.
- De Aquino, T. (1934). Quaestiones disputatae de anima. Vol. 24. Roma y París: Commissio Leonina du Cerf.
- ____ (1994). L’unité de l’intellect contre les Averroistes. A. De Libera (trad.) Paris: GF-Flammarion.
- ____ (1999). Somme contre les Gentilis. Paris: GF-Flammarion.
- ____ (2004). L’Unité de l’intellect. Paris: Vrin.
- De Brabant, S. (1972). Quaestiones in tertium de anima, de anima intellectiva, de aeternitate mundi. B. Bazán (ed.) Louvain et Paris: Publicatioins Universtaires-Béatrice-Nauwelaerts.
- De Libera, A. (). Existe-t-il une noétique averroiste? Note sur la réception latine d’Averroès aux XIIIe et XIVe siècles. En Averroismus im Mittelalter und in der Renaissance. F. Niewöhner et L. Sturlese (eds.) Zürich: Spur Verlag.
- ____ (2004). Sujet. En Vocabulaire européen des philosophies. B. Cassin (ed.) Paris: Le Seuil-Le Robert.
- Dewan, L. (1981). Obiectum. Notes on the invention of a word. En Archives d’Histoire Doctrinale et Littéraire du Moyen Âge, 48: 37-96.
- Kuksewicz, Z. (1968). De Siger de Brabant à Jacques de Plaisance. La théorie de l’intellect chez les averroistes latins des XIIIe et XIVe siècles. Wrocklaw, Varsovie, Cracovie: Ossolineum.
- Taylor, R. C. (1999). Remarks on Cogitatio in Averroes’ Commentarium Magnum in Aristotelis De Anima Libros. Averroes and the Aristotelian Tradition Sources. Constitution and Reception of the Philosophy of Ibn Rushd (1126-1198). Leyde, Boston and Cologne: Brill.