Ion Vlad

Relatively recent literature on supposition theory seems to use different modern logical tools of interpretation that can be generally described as formalizations. Since the act of formalizing may be understood as a process of changing its object in the sense of making it more formal, an assessment of this kind of approaches is necessary. Accordingly, our main goal in this paper is to analyze the formality of Peter of Spain’s theory of supposition and to evaluate its interpretation as a quantification theory. Our main thesis is that although Peter’s theory presents certain weak notions of formality, the formality presupposed by the quantificational interpretation is nowhere to be found in his considerations.

In this paper, I will try to analyze St. Augustine’s and Dante’s views towards history by showing how their visions can be articulated into particular models of history, i.e. a particular schema that describes the unfolding of history with its specific focal points, and to what extent this model differs from one author to another. If in Augustine’s case, by exploring his division of sacred history in component parts, that can be found throughout his work, I will argue for a Christocentric model, in Dante’s case, by analyzing his work on political philosophy, De monarchia, I will argue for a teleological model of history.