Paradoxical reconciliations · thesis 1>15

Thesis 1>15

Latin

In quaestione de contingentia ad utrumlibet in materia de casu et fortuna, re et fundamentaliter non discordant Auenrois et Auicenna, licet superficie tenus et in uerbis eorum oppositum appareat.

Copy-text: Farmer 1998, line 18797

English

On the question of contingency to either outcome in the matter of chance and fortune, Averroes and Avicenna are not, in fact and at bottom, in disagreement, although on the surface and in their wording the contrary may appear true.

Sense checked; no further crux.

Translation: machine-drafted 2026-09-25 by TRANSLATOR-T05; sense checked against farmer1998:18826; awaiting human check

Attribution: Pico's own opinion (section 1>, paradoxical reconciliations of Aristotle, Plato, and other doctors) · Pico's stance: endorses

Farmer's cross-references

• 1.14 Corpus mobile est subiectum scientiae naturalis.
• 1>16 An corpus compositum accipiat physicus a methaphysico, discordare fundamentaliter non possunt Auenrois et Auicenna, et si uerbis discrepent.
• 2.4 Contingentia ad utrumlibet futurorum cognitorum a deo simul stat cum infallibilitate diuinae scientiae.
• 24.2 A Saturniis legibus eximuntur dei qui contentiui et perfectiui sunt; a Iouiis legibus dei Saturnii; a fatalibus legibus omnis anima uiuens i
• 2>14 Necessarium est apud Aristotelem primam causam mouere de necessitate.
• 2>15 Impossibile estet omnino irrationale apud Aristotelem omnia euenire de necessitate, respectu cuiuscunque causae illa necessitas accipiatur.