Talk:Jean Buridan

---

Untitled

A posthumous campaign by Okhamists succeeded in having Buridan's writings placed on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum from 1474-1481.

But according to Index Librorum Prohibitorum, it was created in 1559. Okhamists are trickier than I thought?

Please sign posts! Edit is mine, source was Encyclopaedia Britannica (2001) "Buridan's own works were condemned and placed on the Index of Forbidden Books from 1474 to 1481 by partisans of Ockham." No byline in the article. Perhaps a misunderstanding by me about what index? Cutler 19:56, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Justification for Skepticism Comment?

I dispute that Buridan was a founder of religious skepticism or a religious skeptic himself. What is the evidence for this claim?

Justification for Skepticism ?

I also dispute the idea that Buridan was a founder of religious skepticism or a religious skeptic himself. The notion of impetus he conceived makes of him a precursor of Galilee who developped the notion of inertia three centuries later. Both notions are actually mathematically equivalent, although there are slight philosophical differences between the two. But precursors of Galilee need not have been religious sceptics! In fact, the following quote from Buridan proves that Buridan was not a sceptic of the catholic faith at all: "It should also be noted that [when we ask whether metaphysics is the same as wisdom,] we are not comparing metaphysics to theology, which proceeds from beliefs that are not known, because although these beliefs are not known per se and most evident, we hold without doubt that theology is the more principal discipline and that it is wisdom most properly speaking. In this question, however, we are merely asking about intellectual habits based on human reason, [i.e.,] those discovered by the process of reasoning, which are deduced from what is evident to us. For it is in this sense that Aristotle calls metaphysics ‘theology’ and ‘the divine science’. Accordingly, metaphysics differs from theology by the fact that although each considers God and those things that pertain to divinity, metaphysics only considers them as regards what can be proved and implied, or inductively inferred, by demonstrative reason. But theology has for its principles articles [of faith], which are believed quite apart from their evidentness, and further, considers whatever can be deduced from articles of this kind." (QM I.2: 4ra-rb)

Skeptical Methods

It is clear that Buridan was skeptical in method, as the scholastic disputato requires skepticism. Buridan is widely recognized as a master of scholasticism and its methods, which was the origin of the problem of the ass. Though I doubt he was a religious skeptic, he was skeptical about elements of dogma and practices because that is part of his method. --Buridan 15:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

If the only justification for Buridan's alleged scepticism is that he was a master of scholastic methods which 'require skepticism', then scholasticism itself sowed the seeds of skepticism in Europe... This simply does not make sense to me!

By the way, Okham's strong reaction against old fashioned scholasticism and Roman power puts him in a better position to be qualified as a precursor of modern 'skepticism' (although skepticism per se remains a very vague notion if what it is applied to is not clearly stated: religious skepticism and epistemological skepticism should be clearly distinguished; Kant for instance provides a -perhaps too clear- distinction between these two domains) than Buridan himself, contrary to what the article suggests. I simply don't know (and strongly doubt) whether Buridan's reaction against Okham may be considered to have anything to do with scepticism, be it religious, methodological, or other.

Sec. 1.1. "Impetus theory": Momentum being caused by motion? WRONG!

I think that it must not be stated in the encyclopedia such a description that diverge from the modern physical knowledge. In classical physics there is no mention of cause at all: it is said that momentum and motion are just connected to eash other, such that they always come together. But in quantum mechanics the operator of momentum is gradient of the wave function; and according to the Schroedinger equation, the spatial motion is caused by the gradient. So actually it comes that momentum is causing motion; and Buridan said almost the same: that impetus is causing motion. I don't know any branch of physics where it would be stated that momentum is caused by motion, except the case of poorly understood beginner's textbook. Fir-tree 16:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

• Would it be fair to call these metaphysical principles? Here's how I read what's written above: the first metaphysical principle being Motion causes momentum (i.e., Momentum being caused by motion) and the second Impetus causes motion (i.e., spatial motion is caused by the momentum gradient: momentum gradient causes spatial motion). If so and if i'm reading these statements correctly--"WRONG!" commentary aside--this analysis on the metaphysics of modern quantum mechanics should be appropriate in some wikipedia article or other.--Firefly322 (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Religious scepticism

The phrase "religious scepticism" seems to be devoid of a definite meaning in this context. Because several other users made the same claim on this talk page, I removed it from the article. In response to Buridan's claim above that Scholasticism was sceptical, I think that scepticism must in this context be use be used only in its philosophical sense. This sense includes scepticism about whether true knowledge can ever be had or whether anything can be proved. David Hume is perfect example of the philosophical sceptic. Buridan does not share Hume's scepticism in any way that I can see. Srnec 23:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

William of Ockham

I have removed the claim that Buridan was taught by William of Ockham. Although there is great similarity between their mature views, Ockham was not Buridan's teacher for the simple reason that Ockham never taught at the University of Paris. Ockham's philosophical career was spent at Oxford and the Franciscan house in London. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.74.116.234 (talk) 20:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Contradiction with Index Librorum Prohibitorum

The article claims that "A posthumous campaign by Ockhamists succeeded in having Buridan's writings placed on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum from 1474-1481." However, in Index Librorum Prohibitorum it is stated that "The first list of the kind was not published in Rome, but in Roman Catholic Netherlands (1529)". So, according to the later, the index didn't exist in the 15th century. Top.Squark (talk) 18:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Buridan, the Hiker?

The article on Petrarch, who claimed to have climbed the 2,000+m. of Mt Ventoux and thus to be among the first recreational hikers, reports: "However, the nineteenth-century Swiss historian Jacob Burckhardt noted that Jean Buridan had climbed the same mountain [Mt. Ventoux] a few years before".

--174.7.25.37 (talk) 16:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Burdian was not French. Atrois was annexed into France much later.

Even a lot of Calais and abodes was English and Dutch speaking up until WW2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.91.155 (talk) 17:32, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Can we add a “philosophy” section

It’s just to generally describe his philosophy, general overviews of his logix,metaphysics and reception by other philosophers? Krisb121 (talk) 11:36, 24 July 2023 (UTC)