The particular subject of this article is the very first sentence of Aristotle’s Metaphysics book Lambda: what does it really mean? I would stick to the most generous sense: (Aristotelian) qewriva is about substance. Indeed, it has been often held that Lambda ignores the so-called focal meaning, and shows a remarkably rough stage of Aristotle’s conception of prime philosophy. By contrast, in this light, the very incipit of Lambda appears to testify Aristotle’s concern in an ontological foundation of theoretical wisdom as such, which Lambda shares with the Metaphysics “central books”, Zeta in particular, in a not less coherent and possibly more advanced form.
In this paper we study the Antonius Montecatini’s interpretation on the agent intellect. This author of the XVI century is an expert in philology and in history of philosophy. He treats to recover the precedent versions; he compares them with the Aristotle’s text (De anima, III, V) and criticizes them. He sustains that the agent intellect exists in the man; that it is a mental potency, that its job is to do intelligible in act the intelligible in potency, and that its action is under the power of our will.
Aim of the paper is to reconstruct the role played by Aristotle in Kant’s Methodenlehre der Kritik der Urteilskraft. The first part shows Kant’s appropriation of the following Aristotelian structural elements: 1) analogy as a tool of investigation; 2) impossibility of applying mathematics to teleology and metaphysics; 3) regulative use of teleology; 4) inner finality; 5) universal order; 6) ethico-teleological proof; 7) God as condition of the good. The second part deals with Kant’s Aristotelian sources. The paper demonstrates that the Aristotelian elements that are at work in the Methodenlehre der Kritik der Urteilskraft leave little doubt that Kant had read Aristotle either directly or consulting the works of Zabarella and of other pure Aristotelians. Aristotelian philosophy is thus the primary reference for Kant’s writing on teleology and on the relationship between philosophy of nature and metaphysics.
L. ALICI, Il paradosso del potere. Paul Ricoeur tra etica e politica (A. Rigobello),
p. 429 – G.E. ANSCOMBE, Human Life, Action and Ethics (S. Cremaschi), p. 431
– M. BONAZZI - CH. HELMIG (eds.), Platonic Stoicism – Stoic Platonism. The
Dialogue between Platonism and Stoicism in Antiquity (E. Vimercati), p. 433 –
A. CAMPODONICO, Chi è l’uomo? Un approccio integrale all’antropologia filosofica
(L. Baldi), p. 440 – F. CASSINARI, Tempo e identità. La dinamica di legittimazione
nella storia e nel mito (M. Maurizi), p. 443 – P. SGRECCIA, La dinamica
esistenziale dell’uomo. Lezioni di filosofia della salute (A. Rigobello), p. 450 –
P. TZAMALIKOS, Origen: Philosophy of History and Eschatology (I. Ramelli),