William of champeaux biography of christopher walken
Home / Celebrity Biographies / William of champeaux biography of christopher walken
In the Introductions William argues that the signification of infinite terms can be taken affirmatively, negatively, or correctly (ISW I 4.2). William may well have thought that ‘rational’ and ‘rational animal’ have the same signification because each thing signified by ‘rational’ is signified by ‘rational animal’, and conversely.
Early Medieval Philosophy. William's approach here became a model for twelfth-century logic textbooks.
William accepts the standard medieval definition of signification: a sound is significant if it generates an understanding in the mind of a hearer. Mun. 266,” Cahiers de l'Institut du Moyen-Âge Grec et Latin 13 (1974): 13-30.
“Abelard's Rejection Of The Tarski Biconditional,” Logical Analysis And The History Of Philosophy 5 (2002): 143-58
Abelard was a man of considerably less influence allied with the opposite faction. “William of Champeaux on Aristotle's Categories,” forthcoming A
Ed. B. Geyer. William is known to have written commentaries on Porphyry's Isagoge, Aristotle's Categories and DeInterpretatione, Boethius' DeDifferentiisTopicis, and Cicero's DeInventione and Rhetorica ad Herennium. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000.
Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Medievalis, 98. Universal essences exist; they are simply never found except as accidentally differentiated, qua individuals.
In actuality genera and species have their being in individual things.Those which are one considered in a special nature are many considered particularly. This is how the view gets its name. He brags of forcing William to abandon a firmly-held realist theory of universals, but, rather than come over to Abelard's vocalist or nominalist cause, William developed a second, more sophisticated, realist view. Both moves were controversial.
William sometimes refers to the locus as ‘the medium’, by which he does not necessarily mean the middle term but rather the thing that acts as a link between the extremes of an argument.
Lottin 1958 vol V: 190-227; Lefevre 1898 (references above are to Lottin 1958)
Several of William's commentaries have been identified, although in some cases the attribution is tentative.