Erik-Jan Bos
Biographic Data
| ID | 5650859 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Erik-Jan Bos |
| GIVEN NAMES | Erik-Jan |
| FAMILY NAME | Bos |
| SIGNATURE | BOS E |
| AFFILIATIONS | Erasmus University Rotterdam |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-5580-4992 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 5 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 0 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 4 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 1 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2000 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2023 |
| H-INDEX | 0 |
René Descartes The Complete Correspondence in English Translation: From the Early Years to the Discourse on Method, 1619-1638, Vol. 1
Atomism and Cartesianism
In the 1650s, two professors of philosophy at the University of Utrecht defended atomism. Interestingly, one of them, Johannes de Bruyn, is considered to be a staunch Cartesian, while the other, Daniel Voet, was a neo-Aristotelian and strongly opposed to Descartes’s philosophy. This article examines this curious situation and analyses the theories of both professors. While converging with Gassendi on several crucial points, their theories relied …
Henricus Regius et les limites de la philosophie cartésienne
Au printemps 1643, Henricus Regius rencontra la princesse Élisabeth de Bohême à La Haye. Élisabeth avait lu sa « physique » et les Méditations de Descartes, mais certaines questions étaient restées en suspens. Sachant que le professeur d’Utrecht était un ardent partisan du cartésianisme, elle l’interrogea sur l’interaction problématique de ces deux substances distinctes que sont l’âme et le corps. Regius esquiva la question et suggéra à la prince…
Logica modernorum in Prague about 1400
Introduction... 3 1. On the edition of the Prague Sophistriatract . . 3 2. The Prague Sophistria . . 5 3. Another sophistria, namely Ms Vienna, Osterr. Nazionalbibl., VPL 4785 (Lunael. O 150), fols. 233v-280v (8o) .. 21 5. A few notes on the contents... 27 6. Some notes on logicians and approaches to logic before our sophistria... 33 7. The place of the sophistria genre in the history of medieval logic . . 35 8. Constitution of the text... 37 9. …
Chapter Ten
This chapter discusses the way the Scotist Petrus Thomae distinguished the categories from each other and places him in a historical perspective. It explains the problem of the relation between thought (language) and reality and how Peter interpreted it. In medieval thought, logical, semantic, epistemological and metaphysical points of view were interwoven. The author observes that Peter distinguishes the categories not rationally, but really. Th…
No prominent works on this page.
Chapter Ten
This chapter discusses the way the Scotist Petrus Thomae distinguished the categories from each other and places him in a historical perspective. It explains the problem of the relation between thought (language) and reality and how Peter interpreted it. In medieval thought, logical, semantic, epistemological and metaphysical points of view were interwoven. The author observes that Peter distinguishes the categories not rationally, but really. Th…
Logica modernorum in Prague about 1400
Introduction... 3 1. On the edition of the Prague Sophistriatract . . 3 2. The Prague Sophistria . . 5 3. Another sophistria, namely Ms Vienna, Osterr. Nazionalbibl., VPL 4785 (Lunael. O 150), fols. 233v-280v (8o) .. 21 5. A few notes on the contents... 27 6. Some notes on logicians and approaches to logic before our sophistria... 33 7. The place of the sophistria genre in the history of medieval logic . . 35 8. Constitution of the text... 37 9. …
Henricus Regius et les limites de la philosophie cartésienne
Au printemps 1643, Henricus Regius rencontra la princesse Élisabeth de Bohême à La Haye. Élisabeth avait lu sa « physique » et les Méditations de Descartes, mais certaines questions étaient restées en suspens. Sachant que le professeur d’Utrecht était un ardent partisan du cartésianisme, elle l’interrogea sur l’interaction problématique de ces deux substances distinctes que sont l’âme et le corps. Regius esquiva la question et suggéra à la prince…
René Descartes The Complete Correspondence in English Translation: From the Early Years to the Discourse on Method, 1619-1638, Vol. 1
Atomism and Cartesianism
In the 1650s, two professors of philosophy at the University of Utrecht defended atomism. Interestingly, one of them, Johannes de Bruyn, is considered to be a staunch Cartesian, while the other, Daniel Voet, was a neo-Aristotelian and strongly opposed to Descartes’s philosophy. This article examines this curious situation and analyses the theories of both professors. While converging with Gassendi on several crucial points, their theories relied …
Philosophy (4 works) · Historical Philosophy and Science (3 works) · Classical Philosophy and Thought (2 works) · Epistemology (2 works) · Medieval Philosophy and Theology (2 works) · Atomism (1 work) · Cartesianism (1 work) · Computer Science (1 work) · Intellect (1 work) · Linguistics and language evolution (1 work)