more on intension and remission

gregory of rimini
Gregory's most important writing by far is his commentary on the first two books of the Sentences. Book I survives in some twenty complete manuscripts, while there are about a dozen for book II. The work was printed several times from 1482 to 1532, reprinted in 1955, and finally received a modern critical edition in six volumes in 1979-84 (Rimini 1979-84; Bermon 2002). Parts have been or are being translated into French, German, and English. In addition to scriptural commentaries and his letters as prior general, Gregory was also responsible for smaller writings, including a work usually known as De usura, printed in 1508 and again in 1622 (see below, section 6), and a treatise on the four cardinal virtues, De quatuor virtutibus cardinalibus. His tract on the intension and remission of forms, De intensione et remissione formarum corporalium, carries the incipit "Circa secundum partem huius distinctionis" and is, therefore, just an excerpt of the Sentences commentary, book I, distinction 17, part 2.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/gregory-rimini/

3. Writings
Autrecourt's oeuvre is not large. There is a correspondence with the Franciscan theologian Bernard of Arezzo, and with a certain master Giles (possibly Giles of Feno), and a treatise that has come to be known as the Exigit ordo. Furthermore, we have a theological question dealing with the intension and remission of forms and the problem of minima and maxima (utrum visio alicuius rei naturalis possit naturali intendi [Could the vision of any natural thing be naturally intensified?]).
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/autrecourt/


CAROTI, STEFANO, “Some Remarks
on Buridan’s Discussion on Intension
and Remission,” Vivarium 42.1 (2004):
58-85.


Although occasioned by a problem in dynamics,Bradwardine's treatise on ratios actually resulted inmore substantial contributions to kinematics by otherOxonians, many of whom were fellows of Merton Col-lege in the generation after him. Principal among thesewere William of Heytesbury, John of Dumbleton, andRichard Swineshead. All writing towards the middleof the fourteenth century, they presupposed the valid-ity of Bradwardine's dynamic function and turned theirattention to a fuller examination of the comparabilityof all types of motions, or changes, in its light. Theydid this in the context of discussions on the “intensionand remission of forms” or the “latitude of forms,”conceiving all changes (qualitative as well as quanti-tative) as traversing a distance or “latitude” which isreadily quantifiable. They generally employed a “let-ter-calculus” wherein letters of the alphabet repre-sented ideas (not magnitudes), which lent itself to subtlelogical arguments referred to as “calculatory soph-isms.” These were later decried by humanists and moretraditional Scholastics, who found the arguments in-comprehensible, partly, at least, because of theirmathematical complexity.
One problem to which these Mertonians addressedthemselves was how to “denominate” or reckon thedegree of heat of a body whose parts are heated notuniformly but to varying degrees. Swineshead devoteda section of his Book of Calculations (Liber calcula-tionum) to solve this problem for a body A which hasgreater and greater heat, increasing arithmetically byunits to infinity, in its decreasing proportional parts.He was able to show that A should bedenominated as having the same heat as another bodyB which is heated to two degrees throughout its entirelength, thus equivalently demonstrating that the sumof the series 1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8... converges to thevalue 2. Swineshead considerably advanced Brad-wardine's analysis relating to instantaneous velocityand other concepts necessary for the calculus; signifi-cantly his work was known to Leibniz, who wishedto have it republished.
Motion was regarded by these thinkers as merelyanother quality whose latitude or mean degree couldbe calculated. This type of consideration led Heytes-bury to formulate one of the most important kinemati-cal rules to come out of the fourteenth century, a rulethat has since come to be known as the Mertonian“mean-speed theorem.” The theorem states that auniformly accelerated motion is equivalent, so far asthe space traversed in a given time is concerned, toa uniform motion whose velocity is equal throughoutto the instantaneous velocity of the uniformly acceler-ating body at the middle instant of the period of itsacceleration. The theorem was formulated during theearly 1330's, and at least four attempts to prove itarithmetically were detailed at Oxford before 1350. Asin the previous case of Bradwardine's function, no
http://etext.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhiana.cgi?id=dv2-23

Speculum 25, 1950-49, 1975
Herman S HAPIRO, Walter Burley and the Intension and Remission of Forms, in: Speculum 34, 1959, p. 413 A.I. D OYLE, An Unrecognized Piece of Piers the Ploughman's Creed and Other Work ...