1,721,239 research outputs found
Response: Fazzo on Golitsis on Fazzo, Il libro Lambda della Metafisica di Aristotele
No full textOne peculiar feature of Golitsis’ review (BMCR 2013), apart from the fact that he does not argue for his views (which makes discussion difficult), is that I have hardly expressed any opinions he opposes, either in the book under consideration or in my 2010 article. Golitsis especially insists on dating and on chronological hypotheses. However, his “objections” are themselves open to rather severe criticisms on other grounds, especially since they deal with what I take to be crucial matters that require special care. Golitsis has, e.g., a 12th c. text (Michael of Ephesus commentary on Metaphysics Lambda) in a manuscript (Laur. 87.12) which he claims to be copied during the 11th c.; he also claims a 10th c. manuscript (Paris. gr. 1853) to be the exemplar of a 9th. c. one (Vind. phil. gr. 100). And so on and so forth. On the other hand, there is no sign he has analytically considered the main content of the book he is reviewing
ARISTOTELICA N. 8/2025, Torino, Rosenberg & Sellier a cura di Silvia Fazzo ISBN pdf 9791259934666
No full text
Luca Gili, Silvia Fazzo, Heavenly Matter in Alexander of Aphrodisias Acta Philosophica 1. 34. 2025 pp. 165-172.
No full textAbstract – In this paper, we argue that Alexander made an original contribution to the history of
metaphysics in the Aristotelian tradition, when he argued that both heavenly and sublunary bodies
are composed by the same type of indeterminate matter. Aristotle, on the other hand, has not been
unanimously interpreted as subscribing to the idea that there only a type of indeterminate matter.
There is a controversial text in Metaphysics, Λ that is preserved in two versions: while the reading
attested by the direct tradition seems to make room to a distinction between two types of matter,
Alexander states that he could also read a copy with a reading allowing for a single type of merely
indeterminate matter. He consistently maintained that this second reading better corresponded to
Aristotle’s thought. In doing this choice, he could develop an original version of Aristotelianism
La tradizione a stampa della Metaphysica Nova arabo-latina negli incunaboli e nelle cinquecentine
No full textThis paper provides an annotated list of printed editions of Aristotle’s
Metaphysica Nova, i.e. of the Arabic-Latin 13th-century version of Aristotle’s
Metaphysics, which circulated within the Latin translation of Averroes’
Commentarium Magnum (Tafsīr mā baʿd al-ṭabīʿat). It is shown that this
version – the impact of which was second to none – was never printed without
at least one Greek-into-Latin version. From the 1473 editio princeps to the
1562 Iunctas edition, complementary material from the Greek into Latin and
from the Arabic into Latin Aristotelian traditions was increasingly added.
Links to relevant digital reproductions are also provided
Fazzo, Silvia and Makuc, Jaka, “Heidegger’s teaching on Metaphysics Lambda 6 (HGA 62 , pp. 102-105): a challenge for Aristotelizing scholars”, Kronos VOLUME XI / 2022 / ISSN 2392-0963, pp. 72-85
No full textMH' approach to Aristotle is highly unconventional. It offers a crucial key towards MH's own philosophy. As a specimen, our paper deals with MH's deconstructed approach to a book by Aristotle – Metaphysics Lambda – as in HGA 62, summer semester 1922. Aristotle’s Metaphysics Lambda played the overarching role in the Aristotelian scholarly tradition, whereas the young MH, for the sake of his 1922 Freiburg classes, reduces it to bits and pieces. Here, we put in the middle his short but significant quotes from this book. We focus on MH’s most original methodological attitudes. We find that MH’s quotes are fully idiomatic, refilled as they are with new meaning and values: his Übersetzungen are in no way meant to be just literal translations. In fact, in MH’s own view, the remaining part of his class can be regarded as an investigation and exegesis of his own Übersetzungen from Aristotle.
This offers the chance to contextualize Heidegger’s way of treatment of Aristotle's Metaphysics books, particularly Lambda, in the early 20th c. German Universities. A main role was played by Werner Jaeger’s youth monograph (Studien zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Metaphysik des Aristoteles, Berlin 1912) which was credited with immediate success within the German academic milieu: Jaeger’s hypothesis were promptly amplified and taken as a paradigm in the 1919 revised edition of Ueberweg-Praechter Grundriß ...– i.e., in MH’s favorite reference work for the sake of MH’s 1922 classes. We may conclude that Jaeger’s negative reconstruction of the aim and scope of Aristotle's first philosophy underlies MH’s attitude toward Lambda and other Aristotle Metaphysics books
Fazzo S. e Zonta M. “Toward a « critical translation » of Alexander of Aphrodisias’ De principiis, based on the indirect tradition of Syriac and Arabic sources
No full text
- …
