|previous article in this issue|
Document Details :
Title: Ockham and Bradwardine on Propositions De incipit et destinit
Author(s): ROQUES, Magali
Journal: Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie Médiévales
Volume: 86 Issue: 1 Date: 2019
In this paper, I discuss Lauge Nielsen’s interpretation of the positions of Ockham and Bradwardine on incipit and desinit propositions in his 1982 paper 'Thome Bradwardini Angli de incipit et desinit'. In the first part I will present the most distinctive features of Bradwardine’s treatise. In the second part I will suggest that in Summa logicae II.19 Ockham is not replying to Bradwardine’s criticism and that in this chapter he offers a solution that is not incompatible with the one he proposes in SL I.75. At best, we may think of Ockham’s account in SL II.19 as a revision and a deepening of his earlier account. I will argue that Nielsen therefore has no good argument to support his claim that the treatise he attributes to Bradwardine should be dated to 1323. I will conclude that the available evidence is too tenuous to attribute the treatise to Bradwardine with certainty. The possibility that the treatise was written by Thomas Maulfelt should not be excluded, since two of the four manuscripts attribute it to him.