No description available.

Thesis advisor: Jean-Luc Solère / This dissertation pursues a philosophical analysis of the epistemic claims of the discipline of theology--a intellectual discipline whose unique identity was being crafted in the high and late Middle Ages. In particular, this study focuses on how the theologian can both rely on "faith" and "authority" while also claiming to acquire a kind of knowledge that the simple believer does not have. The prologue to Sentences Commentary of the Augustinian, Gregory of Rimini, is the focal point of the dissertation, since the "prologue" is the typical place for theologians to philosophically reflect on the nature of their discipline. However, Rimini will be considered carefully in light of his fourteenth-century context. The study will look specifically at those thinkers Rimini directly engages with: namely, Aquinas, Duns Scotus, Peter Aureoli, William of Ockham and Adam Wodeham. But, in light of Rimini's status as an Augustinian hermit, the study will also be attentive to the tradition of Augustinian theologians that precede Rimini; most notably, this is Giles of Rome, star pupil of Aquinas and the intellectual father of the Augustinian Order. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2012. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Philosophy.

Comment parler de « la femme » ? En effet, ce thème sollicite bon nombre de discours qui n’appartiennent pas au même domaine scientifique et n’ont pas la même méthode. Quelle science doit donc être employée pour déterminer la hiérarchie des discours qui ont la différence sexuelle pour objet ? Quelle est la place de la philosophie dans la constellation des savoirs que le XIIIème siècle a vu se croiser à l’occasion d’un tel « thème » ? Que ce soit dans les discours universitaires d’Albert le Grand, de Thomas d’Aquin, de Bonaventure ou de Gilles de Rome, il appert que l’objet d’étude qu’est la « femme » est épistémologiquement cohésif. Les autorités comme Aristote, Galien, Avicenne et Averroès sont confrontées à Augustin, Pierre Lombard, Paul de Tarse et aux « Saintes Ecritures ». Est-ce donc à la Révélation de donner les principes des discours sur « la femme », ou bien à la médecine de discriminer ou de prouver les thèses morales et politiques concernant la différence sexuelle ? Chaque auteur semble avoir une réponse qui témoigne de son épistémologie sous-jacente et c’est la cohérence scientifique pour parler de la sexuation et, en définitive, de la femme, qui est visée par ces auteurs du Bas Moyen-Age. / How can we speak about « woman »? Indeed, many discourses refer to this subject without belonging to the same scientific field and without sharing the same methodology. Which science should be selected to determine the hierarchy of the discourse about sexual difference? What part did philosophy play in this subject among the manifold fields of knowledge of the 13th century? In the academical corpus of Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Giles of Rome and many others, the study of woman looks epistemologically cohesive. Authoritative voices such as those of Aristotle, Galen, Avicenna and Averroes are confronted with those of Augustine, P. Lombard, Paul, and with the “Holy Scriptures”. Is it hence up to the Book of Revelation to provide the principles underpinning the discourses on “woman”, or up to medical authorities to distinguish between or prove the moral and political theses on sexual difference? Each author’s answer to this question seems to testify to his underlying epistemology and it is the scientific consistency which characterizes the talk about the gender, and ultimately about the woman, which is targeted by these Late Middle Ages authors.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / This is the study of Engelbert of Admont's unique and practical take on Aristotelian political theory post-rediscovery of Aristotle's ethico-political works. Through the methods of reception theory and a comparative analysis of his first major political treatise, De regimine principum, with those of his contemporaries similar political treatises (i.e., St. Thomas Aquinas, Giles of Rome, and Marsilius of Padua) and their use of Aristotelian sources and concepts--e.g. lex animata--I have shown not only Engelbert's more original, unique, and practical approach to political philosophy within the Aristotelian political tradition of the later Middle Ages, but also a more comprehensively eclectic nature of this tradition. Engelbert's political philosophy as espoused in his De regimine principum is thus a watershed in the development of the use of practical political science.