Talk:Bonaventure/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Bonaventure. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
link 'anti-mendicant party' to 'william of saint-amour'?
Bonaventure's chief opponent of in the mendicant/secular clergy conflict was William of Saint-Amour; so, barring some article being written about the so-called anti-mendicant party, why not link to the William article (esp. since a lot of that short article deals with this very issue)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.85.29 (talk) 05:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Not written in the encyclopedic style
It's written as theology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott Adler (talk • contribs) 10:14, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- His philosophy and theology is most notable and is in the proper section. 74.5.111.155 (talk) 03:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with the original poster here. The "philosophy" section is a mess. There is no attempt at making it understandable to a general audience, and it is completely unstructured. It needs major cleanup. — AlekJDS talk 05:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Gibberish
Anybody have a clue as to what this second sentence is supposed to mean? "Nowadays German philosopher Hattrup denies that De Reductione Artium ad Theologiam might be written by Bonaventure. The style of thinking does not match the original style; this is ecstatic, but De Reductione works comprehending." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.14.124.47 (talk • contribs) 06:56, 28 September 2010
- No idea; it's been abbreviated since I could make no sense of it. It seems like a bad translation from German. — AlekJDS talk 05:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
This refers to an old argument by Hattrup poorly stated in Engerman. His position is no longer tenable due the research published in vol. 67 (2009) of Franciscan Studies. See the articles by Benson, Hammond, Hughes, and Johnson, ----