Hood Report As always, the post has two parts: the anecdotal and philosophical. A lack of color, subtitles will guide you to avoid reading a boring choro, and others can go straight to the promised delivery.
This has three sections: Trivia, Choro Philosophical and Epilogue. The epilogue is cute, so they can spend at the end of those boring post and take a philosophical choro oclayo.
I'm going to sleep while (it often happens that I write these introductions the end) and see you soon, when I got to publish it here recorded.
Ah! Parish Notices: well yes, the billboard is paying mothers. But yes, every Tuesday there will be advances in theory and every Friday (for protests Higuito) higuiátrico choro. The other days are still pending .
Trivia
life
Without closing internet works much better. Why not me in the slightest effort to get it. If you need something, there are the IIFs or Mom's. Or the Starbucks or sangrona's.
The sangrona's. Had told them no? suddenly my ma had some exotic symptoms. The people of Xola sangrona's behaved to every mother with us. And that night I awake in the hospital. Not sleeping was not the problem, as you understand, but the strange environment. And since the Internet is reserved for patients who have earned the right to bed, I had no more than continue translating. A Anzulewicz ratites to ratitos Albert.
One advantage of private hospitals is that the family has free access to their sick child. And when I heard my mom snoring peacefully I left all the terrors and I could sit down to translate. I never thought I looked like a Latin language so fluent after the headaches caused by the German. And to my great fortune, he acknowledged that Latin had long had to translate from German, I'm going very slow but surely. Early
doitor specialist arrived and I said that everything was in order. From early morning he had sent the correct medications, and pneumas moods and my ma were back in order. Exotic symptoms subsided and we returned home happy.
But assume that it should be a report of my tesistas progress, not the events surrounding the thesis. One of the events is Åsa Larsson, but not related to fellow Stieg Larsson. And the thing works. When I have internet under the heading of "the weaker sex." But either because I got the blues, or as he lowered his inventiveness to the writers, the fact is that the soap opera seems increasingly dull, repetitive and slug. The wife left the husband is still behaving as if it were abandoned wife. The children of divorce see their parents remarry. Click novel: what is needed is that we teach the little children of divorced parents that we can remain happy because divorce affects not love our parents have. Although not always the case. But it should be. And the other characters and give me free spawn. Not depart from the cliché of good and bad. So the Colombian telenovelas are so Path: Yago because they need to be good dramas.
Anyway. I still Divangar. The fact is that a lack of soap, I have a novella by Åsa Larsson. And has the quality that one begins to understand that living in the north pole is to live eternally wet. You sweat but you can not remove the anorak (what the hell is an anorak? Without wikipedia I can not figure out). And if you're not careful, you can not get the car because it snowed a lot. And that is ridiculous when Estocolmianos arrive at Kiruna in light clothing. I guess that's 'light clothes' does not refer to garments that are customary in Yucatan summer. And the cold wind is like opening the skin Lajitas. And people come to work at four in the morning, because simply no point in living under a clock that does not get under the sun, or whenever there is light or there is never light. So if someone has insomnia, he goes to work. Okay read Åsa Larsson, and I have an idea of \u200b\u200bhow Finland (although the novel is about Sweden). Total: the only thing that gives me panic in Finland is the Finnish has 15 cases and I doubt that sometime in life can learn more than Perkele. But everything else I am not afraid. It does not happen to die made ice cubes.
Choro Philosophical
Ah yes ... the report.
Well, things are well. Nuchelmas finished reading. Two things got clear (and a useful bibliography of Emesa Nemesio about the thirteenth century.) One, the intent is not fully given if it is in the proposition. Ok. Ando discovered the coffee. And the other is that Alberto intentio in at least the elictae intentioned can be a parent to the dictates of Abelard (or as I call enuntiabile later.) That is: where lies are truth or falsity (the bearers of true and falsity.) That makes it quite distinct from Avicenna. According to me, for the intentioned Avicenita are what is made or broken with the formae (the product of sensory perception), ie, they are one of the terms of the conjunction. But Alberto is the composition or division itself. (And yes, I seemed to perceive, at last, what is the problem of empty names: it's like dividing by zero).
If I prove that, up to Deborah Black release me (again). It is not enough that the intentio be a sign of something to be intentional. From Aristotle's On Interpretation is very clear that there are sequences of signs that are incomplete and others that are complete. The proposition is the only complete. And I believe that only through it can return to the world. Sure! is necessary that the names refer to the proposition hold, but the term itself is unable to relate. Needs the vehicle of the proposition.
Or (as the French say), it happens at the level of content intellective, it must pass the sensitive soul similarly if it is to refer.
But first it might be worthwhile to clarify a few things (that I have confused rete). One is that 'concept' we understand it as something belonging to linguistic beings right?. But, for example, for a thirteenth (ie, the thirteenth century) a 'concept' of reason always implies the presence of a universal. Universal, I would almost say, is for our contemporaries an exotic creature among creatures conceptual. One more that is difficult to treat if one refuses to nominalism (perhaps for the Stoics was equally problematic.) But for a scholastic Aristotelian universal is the basis of rationality, or rather, of understanding.
In a very nice little article that I spent the Lobito on language in animals as Albertus Magnus, is evidenced the thing: the serpent whispered to Eve was a vehicle of the devil (body wise), but the snake did not understand the words who uttered. Why? because it lacks a rational soul, ie the intellect capable of housing the universal. Without such 'disembodied body' the snake does not capture the meaning or significance of what he says, because, as I, a concept is merely the fulfillment of a universal individuating features materials. But these characteristics are individuating inaprehesibles for understanding. This needs to return to the 'image sensitive' to identify the universal concept. Understand that this is an orange requires trade between the intellect and imaginative powers. So there is no homunculus fallacy. But also why there is no theory the proper name. And maybe that's why he had to get their hands a century after the theory to work better. If
theory of language as it is somewhat deficient as a theory of mind is almost perfect. Almost because, as I have seen throughout this century, how exactly the trade occurs between the universal and the particular within the soul is not so easy to explain. However, in general the scheme works well, even has a near-natural solution to the problem of empty names. Imagination will always be there for the lack of reference auxilizar.
Now if the sound level required to refer the declarative sentence, that is, able to assert that the state of things in the world, what happens to the soul level sensitive? As we need a scoring Wolfson dianoetikón similar to Aristotelian and divide a level of sensation.
(go for coffee, I keep explaining orita)
seven minutes
* *
(and came)
Well, we have the power that unites and divides. Is that enough? Perhaps compare with Avicenna first serve here for something.
Our beloved physician knows that unite and divide enough to explain the behavior private animal intellect. What causes the horse to combine 'red, round and sweet' feel like the apple? An orthodox Aristotelian would say that the mere fancy stored in memory, which relates that with appetite and pleasure enough. What makes the dog issue to the stone that has beaten him before? Orthodox say the same pain that the union with the image of the stone. But here things get complicated. What kind of passion is pain? What are referred to the pain? "'Pain' is a property of the thing?
No. 'pain' is not an intentional property (yes, rivers of ink have run on this, but I adhere to those who argue that ... and I think also Avicenna). And if not, then there can be a property of 'stone', ie could not be put into composition with the image of the stone (which, being the image, refer to: ergo, it is intentional). The dog has a sore leg, but how combining 'pain' with 'rock'?
Actually, what the dog needs is to be attributed to the stone the property of 'painful' or 'agent of pain. " But being "agent of pain 'is not a sensible quality, therefore can not be perceived by the senses. Say, the hand feels cold or hot, pain or itching; but that's not the same as attributing the heat a cup of coffee or cold to snow.
So what is it like to be 'agent of pain'? Nuchelmas
us a brief summary of the Stoic theory of lekt (I assume via Rist). And yes, it might be a clever way to explain the situation to Avicenna. A body is an agent, say estoiquitos. And the actions of that body as they are not themselves bodies. In 'The knife cuts', 'knife' is a body and 'cut' the action it performs. Is incorporeal. And so imperceptible to the senses. (I can not remember how things were going, but had already written better. It's happened in the next issue: the relationship of the intentioned sensibilis lekt Avicenna).
The kern of the case, then, is that the action exerted by the stone on the dog is not something that is perceived by the external senses: not seen and not palpable. Of course remains unclear, if my hypothesis is correct, how is that 'pain' we went to the intentio of "agent of pain." But at least solve the central problem posed by Avicenna: how to obtain, not through the intellect, a kind of practical information that will enable the beast to act accordingly and protect your life.
(For the most important case this is not the natural caution but the stone that hit the dog. The precautions are an exception explaining why the sheep are not extinct, if the experience needed to fear the wolves, and would disappear, since they are unable to communicate with each other experiences, let alone as he teaches the sheep the lamb that wolves are dangerous).
As you can see, dear readers, what you get with your intentioned Avicenna is the ability to explain how the union and division operates successfully without universal concepts that allow the execution of the practical syllogism.
Or (again in French) for just Avicenna the conjución and division of these elements to ensure the reference to the world. Ie the apperception of the state of affairs. No complicated, it goes further.
But Latinos, while Aristotle had no next to each other subterfuges were devoted to making the argument, had many other concerns. Where lies the truth or falsity? "In the state of affairs or mental content? "At an intermediate, namely, something like the contemporary proposal that guarantees the truth persists beyond the disappearance of those who believe in it? But if the philosopher and said mean things under the impressions that are in the soul, then what role the mental contents?
Here's where the happy dictates or enuntiabiles.
(cigars ... here I go and I choked and I need fresh air to see if I can pick up the thread. Just advance them something: in the end everyone will end by saying that the mental correlates of the dictates that proposition mysteriously is not something that is apprehended through the senses. But the dictates are not property, oh no!. It is the content of the proposition, ie the product of division and composition. Or put another way: veri et falsi ... Sound familiar, dear readers?)
Ok. I have no battery. I'll make a very brief preview of the next installment.
As stated above, the substantial difference between Avicenna and Alberti intentioned, is that the former are properties of the thing, which are subsequently joined or divided with formae. A formae can unite or divide with another (white with salt) or a intentio (hairy-gray with hostility). In contrast, the latter are the product of the merger or division. What unites and divides? the imago or similitudines.
This is very important to note that the same analogy holds Alberto. In a question (do not ask me what: why I'm translating the De homine, because my fucking 100 pages notes a map became unintelligible), said in an objection to a question asks whether, as there are apprehensions simplex and complex, so with sensible objects. The answer is devastating: a difference of Intellect which, by its nature, is able to accommodate both types, the meaning is not. Therefore, the mere apprehensions are in the imaginatio while the compound owned by the phantasia.
But what is the arrest made? veri et falsi intentio. This, as you can see, is analogous to the problem of enuntiabile oder dictates. Why?
The issue of more or less gives you well (ok, recharging batteries ... but do not ask for much):
A proposition does not mean only under their referents. If so, there would be no difference between "white dog" and the two different meanings "the dog is white" (compositio) and "the dog is not white" (divitio). But what thing in the world is referred to by the union or division? There is a steer that is, is not something that falls under the ten Aristotelian categories (as can be 'dog' and 'white'). But it's real, because otherwise there would be no meaning whatsoever. Therefore, whatever it is, is not something that comes first by the senses.
The question, then, is that what is had significantly by the declarative sentence is something that goes beyond simple terms mentioned. And this surplus is what Abelard (the Heloise) called dicta, while his supporters urged to resolve the myriad of problems left ontological, called enuntiabiles.
Some of the fans, they thought that extra something that is apprehended by the intellect without the mediation of the senses. But it does not apprehended in the passive sense that it apprehends the simplex, ie the universal concepts. Others agreed that it is a product of the soul: it is she who, through composition and division produces.
(damn! Now begins to make sense why Albert is so concerned to show that, despite the jucie own senses, the sensitive soul is passive ... hmm).
Well, there are almost no battery (in my mentesita). The way it is. Alberto
postulated in De homine 'two' external sensory faculties: own senses and common sense. And four internal sensory faculties: imagination, fantasy, estimation and memory (and its counterpart rational reminiscence).
The role of the imagination is made of the similitudines or images, and prepares them for the other faculties: the imagination, intellect, memory, or the same common sense. Remember: they are the equivalent sensitivity of simple apprehension.
dyad Then there is the fantasy-estimate. The role of the estimate, in De homine is almost subsidiary to the fantasy. And the role of fantasy is elica the intentions of the false and true through the composition and division of images.
Now, unlike English which has its verb 'elict' in Castilian lack of an equivalent, which leads to headaches, but also be smart about how to find the exact meaning Alberto's term. Elicere What do you mean here? As the Lobito is it produced?
As we have seen, if we keep the analogy with the dictates of Abelard, would be a legitimate translation, unless enuntiabile theory says otherwise Alberto (Alberto has provided such a theory, but stresses that Alberto Nuchelmans in On Interpretation does not pay beyond what they already said Aberlardo and his followers, which gives me hope that something similar to find us Alberto).
Anyway. I ran out of battery. I hope they can, with this, get an idea of \u200b\u200bwhere will the chapter. Now, the important thing: what follow steps for this fucking post will become a chapter?
1 .- The first is to finish translating the De homine. I explain. And read it. And write it down. And took appointments. But I still have an overview of the text. Also, after reading Nuchelmas (here I recognize his talents to Lobito Sen Sei) I dropped the twenty what to look at De homine. Thus, my method is as follows. Translate a 'post' and make it a summary highlighting the points that interest me, and letting noted what appears to me important, prioritizing one thing and another (the big problem with my first file is to write down everything that I called attention, and that became impenetrable).
2 .- The second is to end Ansulewicz. As I understand, there is the issue that interests me in this paragraph, except for a sub topic on materials appendages (which have not yet arrived). In any case, what he says Ansulewicz is relevant to the second part of the thesis: the problem of animatum speculum, ie the causal connection between the perceived and perception. But then I speak to that issue. Is, say, the other side of the problem. If I'm dealing with the intentional, then you have to deal with the causal process.
3 .- Send you to Lobito preliminary results of which I am talking.
4 .- Read a good time for Alberto interpretatione to seek a more solid basis than the stories of Abelard on dicta.
5 .- See if we're staying with the De homine or if we are to enter the De anima. I explain: in the De anima Alberto change the rules (that how you like it!). I think so we got to the De anima. However, this requires going through Averroes (glup!). We'll see if that remains for the proposition that follows, or if it fits into this. It all depends on my speed, and patience of the wolf wolf.
And
. For now.
Epilogue
I met at Lobito in the course of the debate on the Intellect in the thirteenth century. At that time all the blame was such ab Errare ... no, I say, Averroes. Magnum wrote a Commentary to llamdo text of animals. Inconseguible text. Well, there are
I was shocked that the teacher is more likely to happen was to understand the German translation to the Latin text. Anyway. The fact is that we do not want to spend photocopies of the Latin text. And there you have to sangrona of sponge who searched for air, land and sea (well, at the libraries of the city) until he found him. A set of photocopies, then would know they were copies of the copies that had Lobito. He went back when he saw my text. Yo, all proud, as I presumed. It was. At that time we believed that in Mexico there was another copy of the publication of Crawford, but these sets of photocopies.
it happened that one day a friend told me of the existence of Avicenna's books in a bookshop in the city. And I was (I invited Lobito, the record, but he declió the invitation).
What was my surprise when it turned out that this was the library Gregorio López López, recently deceased, who was my teacher of Thomistic Philosophy!. An old man that As I read Chinese, German and Zapotec. And what treasures had there!
I remember at that time was on the phone with Paco who I was telling a vital tragedy ... when in front of me, bound in green with gold letters, addressed the Averroes Latinus, Great Comment ...
AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! !
is strange to think that this was like a godsend, the goddess of fortune, or daimon that I was fortunate. It was like a pact with medieval philosophy. It was like a prize for having so eagerly sought and have succeeded, while an agreement to undertake the journey of no return ... in the hand of my Sen Sei.
It is also curious that the final text is going to study for master's thesis. A seal.
