Scotus on the Distinction Between Nature and Haecceity
With the present article, I aim to analyze and evaluate the application of what Duns Scotus (c. 1265-1308) classifies as qualified distinctions to the relation between a principle of individuation, or haecceity, and the specific nature that corresponds to it. In the Scotistic milieu, a qual...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo publishedVersion |
| Lenguaje: | Portugués |
| Publicado: |
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires
2024
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/petm/article/view/14451 https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=patris&d=14451_oai |
| Aporte de: |
| id |
I28-R145-14451_oai |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
I28-R145-14451_oai2025-11-17 Ferreira de Romariz Bragança, Vitor 2024-03-29 With the present article, I aim to analyze and evaluate the application of what Duns Scotus (c. 1265-1308) classifies as qualified distinctions to the relation between a principle of individuation, or haecceity, and the specific nature that corresponds to it. In the Scotistic milieu, a qualified distinction is traditionally characterized as any distinction requiring inseparability between its distinguenda, while an unqualified distinction is usually viewed as requiring the opposite: separability. My conclusion is that the only qualified distinction able to be applied to nature and haecceity is the one Scotus calls “adequate distinction”. The other two qualified distinctions available –formal and modal– are not up for the job because relevant aspects of the nature/haecceity relation do not conform to their definitions. Com o presente artigo busco analisar e avaliar a aplicação do que Duns Scotus (c. 1265-1308) classifica como distinções qualificadas à relação entre um princípio de individuação ou hecceidade e a natureza específica que lhe corresponde. No milieu escotista, uma distinção qualificada é tradicionalmente retratada como qualquer distinção que exija inseparabilidade entre seus distinguenda, ao passo que uma distinção inqualificada é usualmente vista como exigindo o oposto: separabilidade. A conclusão que defendo é que a única distinção qualificada passível de ser aplicada ao par natureza e hecceidade é a que Scotus denomina “distinção adequada”. As outras duas distinções qualificadas disponíveis –formal e modal– não o são porque suas definições não se harmonizam com aspectos relevantes da relação entre natureza e hecceidade. application/pdf https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/petm/article/view/14451 10.34096/petm.v45.n1.14451 por Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/petm/article/view/14451/13144 Patristica et Mediævalia; Vol. 45 Núm. 1 (2024); 139-152 2683-9636 Duns Scotus Indivituation Nature Haecceity Distinction Duns Scotus Individuação Natureza Hecceidade Distinção Scotus on the Distinction Between Nature and Haecceity Scotus acerca da distinção entre natureza e hecceidade info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=patris&d=14451_oai |
| institution |
Universidad de Buenos Aires |
| institution_str |
I-28 |
| repository_str |
R-145 |
| collection |
Repositorio Digital de la Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBA) |
| language |
Portugués |
| orig_language_str_mv |
por |
| topic |
Duns Scotus Indivituation Nature Haecceity Distinction Duns Scotus Individuação Natureza Hecceidade Distinção |
| spellingShingle |
Duns Scotus Indivituation Nature Haecceity Distinction Duns Scotus Individuação Natureza Hecceidade Distinção Ferreira de Romariz Bragança, Vitor Scotus on the Distinction Between Nature and Haecceity |
| topic_facet |
Duns Scotus Indivituation Nature Haecceity Distinction Duns Scotus Individuação Natureza Hecceidade Distinção |
| description |
With the present article, I aim to analyze and evaluate the application of what Duns Scotus (c. 1265-1308) classifies as qualified distinctions to the relation between a principle of individuation, or haecceity, and the specific nature that corresponds to it. In the Scotistic milieu, a qualified distinction is traditionally characterized as any distinction requiring inseparability between its distinguenda, while an unqualified distinction is usually viewed as requiring the opposite: separability. My conclusion is that the only qualified distinction able to be applied to nature and haecceity is the one Scotus calls “adequate distinction”. The other two qualified distinctions available –formal and modal– are not up for the job because relevant aspects of the nature/haecceity relation do not conform to their definitions. |
| format |
Artículo publishedVersion |
| author |
Ferreira de Romariz Bragança, Vitor |
| author_facet |
Ferreira de Romariz Bragança, Vitor |
| author_sort |
Ferreira de Romariz Bragança, Vitor |
| title |
Scotus on the Distinction Between Nature and Haecceity |
| title_short |
Scotus on the Distinction Between Nature and Haecceity |
| title_full |
Scotus on the Distinction Between Nature and Haecceity |
| title_fullStr |
Scotus on the Distinction Between Nature and Haecceity |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Scotus on the Distinction Between Nature and Haecceity |
| title_sort |
scotus on the distinction between nature and haecceity |
| publisher |
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires |
| publishDate |
2024 |
| url |
https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/petm/article/view/14451 https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=patris&d=14451_oai |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT ferreiraderomarizbragancavitor scotusonthedistinctionbetweennatureandhaecceity AT ferreiraderomarizbragancavitor scotusacercadadistincaoentrenaturezaehecceidade |
| _version_ |
1851375413721300992 |