1 / 198
文档名称:

A Concise Introduction to the Philosophy of Nicholas of Cusa Jasper Hopkins.pdf

格式:pdf   页数:198
下载后只包含 1 个 PDF 格式的文档,没有任何的图纸或源代码,查看文件列表

如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点这里二次下载

A Concise Introduction to the Philosophy of Nicholas of Cusa Jasper Hopkins.pdf

上传人:maruyama.outdoor 2013/1/3 文件大小:0 KB

下载得到文件列表

A Concise Introduction to the Philosophy of Nicholas of Cusa Jasper Hopkins.pdf

文档介绍

文档介绍:a concise
introduction to the philosophy
oFnicholASoFcusa
This page intentionally left blank
a concise
introduction
to the
philosophy of
nicholas of cusa
By jasper hopkins
univecsity of minnesou ppess, minneApolis
Copyright ©1978 by the University of Minnesota.
All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Published by the University of Minnesota Press,
2037 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455,
and published in Canada by Burns & MacEachern Limited,
Don Mills, Ontario
Library of Congress Cataloging In Publication Data
Hopkins, Jasper.
A concise introduction to the philosophy of Nicholas
of Cusa.
Includes English and Latin versions of Nicholas'
Trialogus de possest.
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
1. Nicolaus Cusanus, Cardinal, 1401-. Nico-
laus Cusanus, Cardinal, 1401-1464. Trialogus de possest.
Latin & English. II. Title.
189 78-16802
ISBN 0-8166-0877-6
The Latin version of Trialogus de possest is reprinted
from Renate Steiger, ed. and trans., Trialogus de
possest. Dreiergesprdch uber das Konnen-Ist (1973);
the diagram on p. 83 is from Elisabeth Bohnenstaedt,
trans., Vom Konnen-Sein. Vom Gipfel der Betrachtung
(1947). Permission for both reprintings was granted
by Felix Meiner Verlag, Hamburg.
The University of Minnesota
is an equal opportunity
educator and employer.
pRe&ce
For a long time I kept wondering how best to introduce my
students to the thought of Nicholas of Cusa. Like nearly
everyone else, I supposed that I ought to begin where Nicho-
las began: viz., with De Docta Ignorantia, his first and his
most important philosophical work. Yet, I found myself
unable to get a grip on this treatise, given the number of
Latin passages in which the argument seemed to me either
implausible or unintelligible. Moreover, the students them-
selves were hampered by the necessity ofrelying upon Ger-
main Heron's English translation, which does not do justice
to Nic