Izvorni znanstveni članak
The Polemics Between Frane Petrić and Teodoro Angelucci
Mihaela Girardi-Karšulin
; Institut za filozofiju, Zagreb, Hrvatska
Sažetak
The paper describes the polemics between Frane Petrić and Teodoro Angelucci that focuses on the interpretation of Aristotle's Metaphysics. Petrić believes that Aristotle's and peripatetical metaphysics is impossible as a science that starts from beings in motion and reaches the knowledge about the first immovable mover. Petrić bases this view on an understanding of being as being as the most general that is the object of metaphysics. Metaphysics as the science about the most general cannot at the same time be a science about the most particular and the most elevated, the first mover or God. Angelucci claims that Petrić's notion of being as being is meaningless, and that it is not an object of metaphysics. Being as being that is an object of Physics and Metaphysics is not the most general notion of being, it is the Being of being. Metaphysics and Physics do not differ because of their respective objects, which are the same, but due to the level of reflection. Physics as the knowledge about the natural being necessarily points at what is above it, transcending itself into metaphysics. Metaphysics, on the other hand, does not have God and separate substances as its object, but the natural being in relation with its cause, God and natural substances. The authoress finally points at some of the modern parallels that show the paradigmatic quality of Petrić's and Angelucci's polemics.
Ključne riječi
Hrčak ID:
68478
URI
Datum izdavanja:
6.12.2004.
Posjeta: 976 *