Guillermo de Ockham y Walter Chatton sobre los poderes sensoriales y la materialidad de la sensación
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
Muchos filósofos escolásticos del siglo XIII creían que los poderes sensoriales humanos son distintos del intelecto humano. Este aparente consenso colapsó en los años 1320, 1330 y 1340. La causa inmediata de este cambio fue el rechazo de Walter Chatton a los argumentos de Guillermo de Ockham de que los poderes sensoriales humanos son distintos del intelecto humano. Este artículo examina las motivaciones implícitas y explícitas de Chatton para rechazar los argumentos de Ockham. Por un lado, muestro que, de acuerdo con Ockham, los sentidos son distintos del intelecto porque sostiene que el acto de percibir es material y está ligado al cuerpo de una forma que el pensamiento no lo está. Por otro lado, señalo que Chatton no ve la necesidad de postular tal diferencia entre sensación y pensamiento en cuanto a materialidad o corporalidad, ya que considera que nada en la naturaleza de la experiencia sensorial manifiesta que esta sea material o corporal de una manera diferente a como lo es el pensamiento.
Descargas
Datos de publicación
Perfil evaluadores/as N/D
Declaraciones de autoría
Indexado en
-
—
Para obtener más información sobre un dato, haga clic 
PF es mantenido por el Public Knowledge Project
Detalles del artículo
Citas
Manuscripts
Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 15805.
Primary Sources
Adam Wodeham, Lectura secunda, edited by R. Wood and G. Gál, 3 vols. (St. Bonaventure: St. Bonaventure University, 1990).
Gervasius Waim, Tractatus noticiarum (Paris: 1519).
Gregory of Rimini, Lectura super primum et secundum Sententiarum, edited by A. D. Trapp, V. Marcolino, and M. Santos-Noya, 7 vols. (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1979-1987).
John Duns Scotus, Ordinatio, liber quartus: distinctiones 43-49, edited by C. Balić et al., Ioannis Duns Scoti opera omnia studio et cura Commissionis Scotisticae, vol. 14 (Vatican City: Vatican Polyglot Press, 2013).
Rodrigo de Arriaga, Cursus philosophicus (Antwerp: 1632).
Thomas Aquinas, Quaestiones disputatae de anima, edited by C. Bazán et al., Editio leonina, t. 24, 1 (Rome-Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1996).
Walter Chatton, Reportatio et Lectura super Sententias: collatio ad librum primum et prologus, edited by J. C. Wey, Studies and Texts 90 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1989).
Walter Chatton, Reportatio super Sententias: liber I, distinctiones 1-9, edited by J. C. Wey and G.J. Etzkorn, Studies and Texts 141 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2002).
Walter Chatton, Reportatio super Sententias: liber I, distinctiones 10-48, edited by J. C. Wey and G.J. Etzkorn, Studies and Texts 142 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2002).
Walter Chatton, Reportatio super Sententias: liber II, edited by J. C. Wey and G. J. Etzkorn, Studies and Texts 148 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2004).
Walter Chatton, Reportatio super Sententias, edited by J. C. Wey and G. J. Etzkorn, Studies and Texts 149 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2005).
Walter Chatton, Lectura super Sententias: liber I, distinctiones 1-2, edited by J.C. Wey and G.J. Etzkorn, Studies and Texts 156 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2007).
Walter Chatton, Lectura super Sententias: liber I, distinctiones 3-7, edited by J.C. Wey and G.J. Etzkorn, Studies and Texts 158 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2008).
Walter Chatton, Lectura super Sententias: liber I, distinctiones 8-17, edited by J.C. Wey and G.J. Etzkorn, Studies and Texts 164 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2009).
William Crathorn, In primum librum Sententiarum, edited by F. Hoffman, Quäestionen zum ersten Sentenzenbuch (Münster: Aschendorff, 1988).
William of Ockham, Scriptum in librum primum Sententiarum ordinatio, edited by S. Brown et al., Opera theologica 1 (St. Bonaventure: St. Bonaventure University, 1967).
William of Ockham, Quodlibeta septem, edited by J. C. Wey, Opera theologica 9 (St. Bonaventure, N.Y.: St. Bonaventure University, 1980).
William of Ockham, Quaestiones in librum secundum[-quartum] Sententiarum (reportatio), edited by G. Etzkorn, G. Gál, R. Green, F. E. Kelley, and R. Wood, 3 vols., Opera theologica 5-7 (St. Bonaventure, N.Y.: St. Bonaventure University, 1981-1984).
William of Ockham, Summula philosophiae naturalis, edited by S. Brown, Opera philosophica 6 (St. Bonaventure N.Y.: St. Bonaventure University, 1984).
William of Ockham, Expositio in libros Physicorum Aristotelis: libri IV-VIII, edited by R. Wood et al., Opera philosophica 5 (St. Bonaventure N.Y.: St. Bonaventure University, 1984).
William of Ockham, Brevis summa libri Physicorum, edited by S. Brown, Opera philosophica 6 (St. Bonaventure N.Y.: St. Bonaventure University, 1984).
Secondary Sources
Adams, Marilyn McCord, William Ockham (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1987), 661-664.
Adams, Marilyn McCord, Housing the Powers: Medieval Debates about Dependence on God (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022).
Bayne, Tim, and Michelle Montague, “Cognitive Phenomenology: An Introduction”, in Cognitive Phenomenology, edited by T. Bayne and M. Montague (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), viii-34.
Brower-Toland, Susan, “Medieval Approaches to Consciousness: Ockham and Chatton”, Philosopher’s Imprint 12 (2012): 1-29.
Cory, Therese Scarpelli, “Embodied vs. Non-Embodied Modes of Knowing in Aquinas: Different Universals, Different Intelligible Species, Different Intellects”, Faith and Philosophy 35/4 (2018): 417-446.
Courtenay, William, Adam Wodeham: An Introduction to His Life and Writings (Leiden: Brill, 1978).
Cross, Richard, “Ockham on Part and Whole”, Vivarium 37/2 (1999): 143-167.
De Boer, Sander W., “Dualism and the Mind-Body Problem”, in Philosophy of Mind in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance, edited by S. Schmid (New York: Routledge, 2019).
Hasse, Dag, “The Soul’s Faculties”, in The Cambridge History of Medieval Philosophy, vol. 1, edited by R. Pasnau (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 305-319.
Keele, Rondo, “Oxford Quodlibeta from Ockham to Holcot”, in Theological Quodlibeta in the Middle Ages: The Fourteenth Century, edited by C. Schabel (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 651-692.
King, Peter, “Why Isn’t the Mind-Body Problem Medieval?”, in Forming the Mind, vol. 5, Studies in the History of Philosophy of Mind (Dordrecht: Springer, 2007), 187-205.
Löwe, Can Laurens, “Aristotle and John Buridan on the Individuation of Causal Powers”, in Oxford Studies in Medieval Philosophy 6/1 (2018): 189-222.
Pasnau, Robert, “The Mind-Soul Problem”, in Mind, Cognition and Representation: The Tradition of Commentaries on Aristotle’s De Anima, edited by P. J. J. M. Bakker and J. M. M. H. Thijssen, (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007), 3-21.
Pasnau, Robert, Metaphysical Themes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).
Pasnau, Robert, “Mind and Hylomorphism”, in The Oxford Handbook of Medieval Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).
Perler, Dominik, “Seeing and Judging: Ockham and Wodeham on Sensory Cognition”, in Theories of Perception in Medieval and Early Modern Philosophy, edited by S. Knuuttila and P. Kärkkäinen, Studies in the History of Philosophy of Mind (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2008).
Perler, Dominik, “Ockham über die Seele und ihre Teile”, Recherches de théologie et philosophie médiévales 77/2 (2010): 315-350.
Perler, Dominik, “Faculties in Medieval Philosophy”, in The Faculties: A History, edited by D. Perler (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 97-139.
Pini, Giorgio, “Two Models of Thinking”, in Intentionality, Cognition, and Mental Representation in Medieval Philosophy, edited by G. Klima (New York: Fordham University Press), 81-103.
Wood, Adam, “The Faculties of the Soul and Some Medieval Mind-Body Problems”, The Thomist 75/4 (2011): 585-636.