‎"A comparative look at different ‎ interpretations of Aristotle's theory of 'being qua being'."‎

سال انتشار: 1402
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: انگلیسی
مشاهده: 32

فایل این مقاله در 21 صفحه با فرمت PDF قابل دریافت می باشد

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این مقاله:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_JTIS-3-2_001

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 2 مرداد 1404

چکیده مقاله:

Aristotle considers metaphysics a science that discusses being qua being (or "being insofar as it is being") and its essential attributes. Alongside "being qua being," he also speaks of absolute being. The multiple meanings of "being" in Aristotle's thought have led interpreters to diverse understandings of what Aristotle truly meant by "being qua being? "They would have disagreements. A disagreement that starts from ontology and impacts their theology. Among Muslim philosophers, Avicenna and Averroes (Ibn Rushd), and among Christian philosophers, Albert the Great(Albertus Magnus) and his student Thomas Aquinas, have commented on this matter. In Avicenna's view, what is meant by 'being qua being' is a universal concept that applies to all beings, including the Necessary Existent per se. Consequently, the Necessary Existent is part of the subject matter of philosophy. However, Averroes introduced the highest substance to explain "being qua being" and considered God the subject of philosophy. Consequently, he regarded the proof of God as part of the problems of natural science. In Albert the Great's view, "being qua being" is the simple existence as the first creation of God, and this simple existence is the subject of philosophy. In Thomas Aquinas's perspective, "being qua being," although the subject of philosophy, applies only to contingent beings, and God is the cause of this "being qua being." A comparative study of these disagreements and the reasons behind them forms the framework of this article.

نویسندگان

Sohrab Haghighat

Associate Professor,‎ Department of Islamic Philosophy, Faculty of Theology, ‎Shahid Madani University of Azerbaijan, Tabriz, Iran.‎

مراجع و منابع این مقاله:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این مقاله را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود مقاله لینک شده اند :
  • Avicenna. (۱۹۸۴). Al-Shifa, Al-Ilahiyyat (Theology) (Edited by Abu al-Qetwati, Saeed ...
  • Akbarian, Reza. (۲۰۰۷). Hikmat Muta'aliyyah va Tafakkur Falsafi Mo'aser (Transcendental ...
  • Aquinas, Thomas. (۱۹۹۵) Commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics, Translation and Introduction ...
  • Aquinas, Thomas. (۱۹۸۳). On Being and Essence, translated with an ...
  • Aristotle. (۱۹۹۱). The Complete Works of Aristotle the Revised Oxford. ...
  • Aristotle. (۱۹۶۲). On Interpretation (Peri Hermeneias), Commentary by St. Thomas ...
  • Doig, James. C. (۱۹۷۲). Aquinas on Metaphysics: A Historico-Doctrinal Study ...
  • Gilson, Etienne. (۱۹۹۴). The Christian Philosophy of ST. Thomas Aquinas, ...
  • Gilson, Etienne. (۱۹۶۰). Elements of Christian Philosophy, New York, Doubleday ...
  • Jaeger,Werner. (۱۹۶۲). Aristotle: Fundamentals of The History of Development, Translate ...
  • McInerny, Ralph. (۱۹۵۹). Some Notes on Being and Predication, Journal ...
  • M.D.Rolland Gosselin. (۱۹۴۸). Le De Ente Et Essentia, Paris, Librairie ...
  • Marx, Werner. (۱۹۷۷). Introduction to The Aristotle's Theory of Being ...
  • Owens, Joseph. (۱۹۷۸) The Doctrine of Being in The Aristotelian ...
  • Ross, David (۱۹۷۵), Metaphysics. (۲vol). A Revised Text with Introduction ...
  • Wippel, John. (۱۹۹۵). Metaphysics, in the Cambridge companion to Aquinas, ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع