{"word_count": 362, "character_count": 2415}
Im letzten Heft der Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie médiévales werden zwei Studien des deutschen Teams THOM veröffentlicht, die den Universalienstreit im 15. Jahrhundert betreffen.Mario MELIADÒ, Scientia peripateticorum. Heymericus de Campo, the Book of Causes, and the Debate over Universals in the Fifteenth Century, RTPM, 2012, 79, 195-230.Abstract : The fifteenth-century debate between Albertists and Thomists centered on the elaboration of two alternative models of Peripatetic science, within which the question of universals took on an architectonic function. The present article analyzes the anti-Thomistic position of the Albertist Heymericus de Campo († 1460) and aims to reconstruct the sources as well as the metaphysical assumptions lying behind it. The article shows that the major differences with the rival school originated in Heymericus’ having incorporated within the Peripatetic science the causal paradigm defined by the notion of fluxus. This notion was drawn by Heymericus from the pseudo-Aristotelian Liber de causis as interpreted by Albert. The Book of Causes not only provided Heymericus with the metaphysical foundation for solving the problem of universals, but also represented the main authority legitimizing the inclusion of the doctrine of the flux into the Aristotelian canon. An Appendix offers the edition of Heymericus’ short commentary on the Liber de causis, contained in his Questiones supra libros philosophie Aristotelis (Cod. Cus. 106, ff. 53v-54r).Silvia NEGRI, The Traps of Realism. The Debate over Universals in the Fifteenth Century and the Thomists of Cologne, RTPM, 2012, 79, 231-265.Abstract : Fifteenth-century Thomists were deeply involved in the debate over the nature and mode of universals, which was at the core of the so-called Wegestreit in the late Middle Ages. Their solutions were intended to fill some theoretical gaps left by Thomas Aquinas, who, although he touched on the theme in his work, did not leave a systematic treatment of the topic. This paper investigates the opinions of the major Thomist masters of Cologne as found in their Commentaries on the De ente et essentia and in other sources. It aims to bring into focus the strategies by which those masters ‘canonized’ Aquinas’s doctrine, developing their own views in the process and differentiating them from the views of their institutional rivals.&#160;über den Universalienstreit