Inhaltszusammenfassung

Aristotle's definition of nature as a cause and principle of motion has been widely accepted by subsequent philosophers throughout the centuries despite the fact that it does not clearly state what kind of cause nature is or whether nature is involved in the production of motion as an active or a passive principle. John Philoponus availed himself of Aristotle's indefiniteness and developed nature into an active principle, which permeates and governs all objects within the natural world. His d...Aristotle's definition of nature as a cause and principle of motion has been widely accepted by subsequent philosophers throughout the centuries despite the fact that it does not clearly state what kind of cause nature is or whether nature is involved in the production of motion as an active or a passive principle. John Philoponus availed himself of Aristotle's indefiniteness and developed nature into an active principle, which permeates and governs all objects within the natural world. His definition was equally successful as an emendation of Aristotle's original definition. Nature taken as an active principle was conceived as something similar to soul and was embedded into a larger framework of Neoplatonic cosmology until it was met with disapproval by Avicenna, who intended to dispel the idea of aligning soul with nature in order to provide his own novel definition of nature as part of a universal classification of natural powers.» weiterlesen» einklappen

Autoren

Klassifikation

DFG Fachgebiet:
Philosophie

DDC Sachgruppe:
Philosophie