1245), who asserted that the two kinds of passions pertained to different things but were nevertheless complementary: “The concupiscible is the appetite for pleasurable things … while the irascible power is the appetite to be free of difficult things.” 3 The names of the passions were also fairly well worked out by the time of Thomas. Among the scholastics it was developed in the mid 1230s by John of La Rochelle (d. This taxonomy went back at least to Plato. These in turn were divided into two sorts: the concupiscible and the irascible passions. Although the two appetites were connected, the sensitive part was the “home” of the passions. This had two parts: the intellective appetite (the will) and the sensitive. The passions were, with few exceptions, in the appetitive power. 2 Like Albert the Great, and following Aristotle, Thomas treated emotions as belonging to the “faculties” or “powers” of the soul. Was there anything distinctive about his discussion? (If not, then the question of its effect on practice in non-theoretical works would be moot.) Certainly much of it was derivative. His ideas were most fully worked out in the so-called prima secundae (the first section of the second part) of his Summa theologiae. 2 co. However, note that within the (.)ĢThomas did not, to be sure, talk about “emotions.” Rather he wrote about the passions: the passiones animae (passions of the soul). 5 Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae I-II, q.4 John of La Rochelle, Summa de anima 107, p. 256-262 lists more than 20 passions.3 John of La Rochelle, Summa de anima 106, in Jacques Guy Bougerol ( ed.2 Many of my observations here are borrowed from Simo Knuuttila, Emotions in Ancient and Medieval Phi (.).↑ Cette indication est une erreur : Abélard avait, à cette époque, ainsi qu’il le dit à la fin de sa lettre, quitté Saint-Gildas.Unde postmodum tanto litteras amore complexus est, ut quoscunque filios haberet litteris antequam armis instrui disponeret.
Patrem autem habebam litteris aliquantulum imbutum, antequam militari cingulo insigniretur. Sicut natura terræ meæ vel generis animo levis, ita et ingenio extiti ad litteratoriam disciplinam facilis. Ego igitur oppido quodam oriundus quod in ingressu minoris Britanniæ constructum, ab urbe Nannetica versus orientem octo, credo, milliariis remotum, proprio vocabulo Palatium appellatur. Unde post nonnullam sermonis ad præsentem habiti consolationem, de ipsis calamitatum mearum experimentis consolatoriam ad absentem scribere decrevi : ut in comparatione mearum, tuas aut nullas, aut modicas tentationes recognoscas, et tolerabilius feras.
Sæpe humanos affectus aut provocant aut mitigant amplius exempla quam verba. Nullas enim amici molestias cum suis confert, ut ex comparatione graviores appareant. Denique hanc epistolam potius ad propriam quam ad amici consolationem scripsisse videtur, scilicet ut et præsentes calamitates ex recordatione præteritarum lenius ferret et imminentium periculorum timorem facilius detergeret. Cæterum quid, quo animo egerit vel scripserit, quid passus sit, quanta invidia æmuli in eum exarserint, graphice describit, atque obtrectatoribus suis cursim ex occasione breviter et argute respondet. Toto enim epistolæ textu suam vitam ante actam ab infantia ad illud usque tempus, quo hanc scripsit, diligenter enarrat nullam tamen Joannis Rozelini mentionem facit, quo philosopho doctissimo præceptore usum Otho Frisingensis episcopus, gravis scriptor, qui eodem vivebat tempore, affirmat. Hanc epistolam ex monasterio Divi Gildasii, in minore Britannia sito, quod tunc ipse Petrus Abælardus abbas regebat, scribit ad amicum cujus nomen tota epistola, licet prolixa, nec ipse edit, nec etiam Heloissa, quum hujus epistolæ meminit in secunda.
0 kommentar(er)
