Der kosmologische Gottesbeweis des Ralph von Battle. Rekonstruktion, Kritik und Einordnung

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernd Goebel ◽  
Christian Tapp

Abstract This paper reconstructs (in natural language) and discusses a proof of God’s existence by Anselm of Canterbury’s friend Ralph of Battle (1040–1124), developed in his recently edited De nesciente, a fictitious dialogue between a Christian and an atheist. Without precedent in antiquity and the Middle Ages, Ralph’s proof has never been examined in detail. It combines a “cogito” argument with a two-part cosmological argument. The paper first presents the textual basis and an exegetical interpretation of Ralph’s reasoning, classifies the parts of the proof historically and systematically, and then compares these with the proofs of God’s existence as well as other arguments in Anselm’s Proslogion and Monologion. Finally, it points out some similarities between Ralph’s “cogito” argument and a passage in the Liber pro insipiente, which may suggest that this anonymous critique of Anselm’s Proslogion proof was authored not by Gaunilo, as traditionally thought, but by Ralph.

Vivarium ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 51 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 485-510
Author(s):  
Sara L. Uckelman

Abstract Temporal logic as a modern discipline is separate from classical logic; it is seen as an addition or expansion of the more basic propositional and predicate logics. This approach is in contrast with logic in the Middle Ages, which was primarily intended as a tool for the analysis of natural language. Because all natural language sentences have tensed verbs, medieval logic is inherently a temporal logic. This fact is most clearly exemplified in medieval theories of supposition. As a case study, we look at the supposition theory of Lambert of Lagny (Auxerre), extracting from it a temporal logic and providing a formalization of that logic.


1962 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 169-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Winterbottom

This article does not set out to cast doubts on the established textual basis of the bulk of Quintilian's Institutio, or on the history of the work's fortunes in the Middle Ages. What I say about these things will be unoriginal and, I hope, uncontroversial. My object, however, is to show that what is true of the bulk is not true of 10. 1. 46–131; and to fill in some details in the history of the tradition.


2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ferdinand Gregorovius ◽  
Annie Hamilton

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document