Flustered 发表于 2025-3-23 12:47:01
http://reply.papertrans.cn/24/2302/230176/230176_11.png飞来飞去真休 发表于 2025-3-23 17:33:22
http://reply.papertrans.cn/24/2302/230176/230176_12.pngCANON 发表于 2025-3-23 20:19:49
http://reply.papertrans.cn/24/2302/230176/230176_13.png修饰 发表于 2025-3-24 00:41:03
Text and Translation,The text is reproduced, with minor modifications and the addition of numbered sub-divisions, from . I 145–168, by kind permission of the late F. S. Schmitt, O.S.B. The superscript letters indicate the availability of a note or comment in §7, where the division number and letter are quoted preceded by ‘.’ e.g. ‘.1.11.’. Cf. §0.Lipoprotein 发表于 2025-3-24 05:23:50
Commentary,The numbers shown at the opening of each note are those of the textual subdivisions on which comment is being made. The letters following those numbers are the superscripts given in the translation and text as an indication that the comment is available in connection with the words reproduced at the opening of each note.tooth-decay 发表于 2025-3-24 08:42:00
Book 1974 of St. Anselm‘s dialogue De Grammatico. At the same time the making intelligible of that text has demanded the concurrent proffering of logical elucidations. The framework adopted for the latter is the Ontology of S. Lesniewski. The unsuitability of other current systems of logic for the analysis o万神殿 发表于 2025-3-24 11:13:20
http://reply.papertrans.cn/24/2302/230176/230176_17.pngEpidural-Space 发表于 2025-3-24 17:37:53
http://reply.papertrans.cn/24/2302/230176/230176_18.png托人看管 发表于 2025-3-24 22:39:45
0082-111X f the text of St. Anselm‘s dialogue De Grammatico. At the same time the making intelligible of that text has demanded the concurrent proffering of logical elucidations. The framework adopted for the latter is the Ontology of S. Lesniewski. The unsuitability of other current systems of logic for the手段 发表于 2025-3-25 01:04:37
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5915-6cial language. Neither should the use of allusions to Leśniewski be taken to impy that St. Anselm was anticipating Leśniewski’s logic. However, as both the thinkers mentioned were concerned with general truths as to how things are, it would not be surprising if at some points they had certain theses in common.