avicenna

However, the works of Avicenna and others like him have reached Europe through Arabs, frequently through Spain.

I think Avicenna also deserves a mention as another way educated people would naturally interact with Aristotelian thought.

But they--the translators apart--mostly were reading their Averroes and Avicenna in Latin translations.

Men like Avicenna and Averroes are essentially commentators.

And not just the pagan philosophers: you can also include the work of Islamic philosophers like Avicenna and Averroes, if you like, who made contributions to the existence/essence distinction.

I had, of course, heard ofAbū ʾAlī al-Ḥusayn ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sīnā, or Avicenna for friends, but I had never read what he contributed to philosophy.

Even though you are correct and logicians like Avicenna and Peter of Spain wrote in gory detail about (what we take to be) Medieval Modality[1], this does not make Medieval Logic even remotely as rigorous as its modern incarnation.

For example, he uses Avicenna's argument for the distinction between essence and existence to perfect the understanding of God as Ipsum Esse Subsistens, or self-subsisting being whose very essence is "to be".

> What’s “actual AI” Is Ibn Sina (Avicenna, year ~1000) fine?

Avicenna is awesome, the equivalent of the greatest of the ancient Greeks.

Avicenna (Ibn Sina), arguably the greatest polymath of the Islamic Golden Age, wrote on the medical and philosophical effects of opium and other psychoactives.

Indeed, Averroes's and Avicenna's commentaries figure into the works of Thomas Aquinas.