APA 6th Edition Banić-Pajnić, E. (1990). O uzroku i uzoricima. Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine, 16. (1-2 (31-32)), 119-146. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/83517
MLA 8th Edition Banić-Pajnić, Erna. "O uzroku i uzoricima." Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine, vol. 16., br. 1-2 (31-32), 1990, str. 119-146. https://hrcak.srce.hr/83517. Citirano 04.12.2020.
Chicago 17th Edition Banić-Pajnić, Erna. "O uzroku i uzoricima." Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine 16., br. 1-2 (31-32) (1990): 119-146. https://hrcak.srce.hr/83517
Harvard Banić-Pajnić, E. (1990). 'O uzroku i uzoricima', Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine, 16.(1-2 (31-32)), str. 119-146. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/83517 (Datum pristupa: 04.12.2020.)
Vancouver Banić-Pajnić E. O uzroku i uzoricima. Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine [Internet]. 1990 [pristupljeno 04.12.2020.];16.(1-2 (31-32)):119-146. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/83517
IEEE E. Banić-Pajnić, "O uzroku i uzoricima", Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine, vol.16., br. 1-2 (31-32), str. 119-146, 1990. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/83517. [Citirano: 04.12.2020.]
Sažetak The West became acquainted with Liber de causis in the 12th century, which it had erroneously attributed to Aristotle up to the time of Thomas Aquinas' correct attribution in the 13th century. In the theses set down by an unknown author Thomas Aquinas recognized fundamental precepts of Proclus' work Elementatio theologica. In addition to theses concerning causes the work contains a commentary whose authorship has not been precisely ascertained so far. Gučetić's commentary of the mentioned work, written in the mid-16th century, was based only on the theses on causes, and it is obvious that Gučetić was familiar with the commentary of the theses given by Thomas Aquinas immediately following the theses themselves, although Gučetić does not refer to them in his commentary, since he sometimes takes whole sentences from this source.
It is important that this Renaissance commentary written by Gučetić about the work which is expressly Neo-Platonist in its orientation enables us to gain insight into almost all strata of the intellectual tradition which mediated Plato's philosophy to the 16th century West. Therefore it is interesting to see how Gučetić, as a Renaissance Platonist of the Christian orientation, defines his position in his commentary primarily with regard to Neo-Platonist theses in the exposition of the conception of causes and causality, and also with regard to specific interpretations given by Arabic philosophers (whose works he is well acquainted with), especially with respect to his primarily Christian starting-point.
In the analysis of Gučetić's commentaries the emphasis is placed upon his interpretations of Plato's philosophy (since the analysis has been undertaken within the framework of the exploration of Renaissance Platonism).
Gučetić's commentary leaves the basic impression of being essentially an effort to reconcile diverse traditions in the interpretation of causes and causality, as well as divers e attitudes within the same tradition, with a special emphasis on the »Dionysian« variant in the hierarchical system of causes within which all the theses on causes and on the gradation of cause/ /beings as independent factors in the process of creation are still subordinated to the fundamental concept of God as the only cause of creation on which absolutely everything depends, and to whom intelligencies, souls and lower causes serve as mere expedients in the government and rule over the lower world.