Aristotle, Misc

Les neuf contributions de ce volume visent à interroger la notion d’unité chez Aristote et la diversité de ses usages de manière transversale dans le corpus aristotélicien. De fait, il semble indiscutable que la question de l’unité – de ce qu’elle est, de la manière dont elle est appréhendée ou employée – est omniprésente dans la pensée d’Aristote. L’ouvrage offre un parcours qui part de l’enquête « hénologique » sur l’un du livre Iota de la Métaphysique, en passant par l’étude (...) de la notion d’unité dans les écrits épistémologiques et logiques, ou encore dans les contextes biologiques et psychologiques, pour aboutir aux questions de l’unité dans le domaine éthique. Le volume vise à rassembler différentes études locales pour dégager les motifs philosophiques transversaux de la notion d’unité. Les contributions réunies offrent ainsi une nouvelle perspective sur les différents types d’unités complexes dont Aristote admet l’existence et les différents degrés d’unité que ceux-ci présentent. (shrink)

This paper aims to clarify the opposition between Alexander of Aphrodisias, followed by Hermann Bonitz on one side, and Thomas Aquinas, followed by Lambertus Marie de Rijk on the other, regarding the correct reading of an example proposed by Aristotle in Metaphysics V 7, 1017a 34–35, which involves the diagonal and its incommensurability with the side. The author aims to demonstrate that Aquinas’s interpretation (and De Rijk’s one) cannot be accepted and that we should follow Alexander of Aphrodisias and Bonitz.

This chapter first gives a rough outline of the reasoning behind the division of this collection of essays, one part focused on particular issues and the second on more universal ones. It then works out that reasoning in more detail through an examination of the historical development of the relationship between storytelling, as represented by myth and poetry, and history in the Western tradition from Hesiod through Hegel. The thesis is that Aristotle’s philosophical preference for poetry over history is overturned (...) in modernity, an overturning that culminates in Hegel in such a way that the pre-Aristotelian difficulties of determining the differences between stories and histories return. With that in mind, the introduction then summarizes and links the two parts of the collection and the essays collected. Finally, it defends the range of topics in and the multidisciplinary nature of the collection by thinking through the meaning of juxtaposition in relation to Aristotle’s differentiation of luck and chance, concluding with an attempt to show the connections between the topics covered made possible by their respective positions within the collection. (shrink)

The present study analyses Damascius’ naturalism in the light of the definition of the activities attributed to φύσις. This subject will be examined both by reference to Galen’s physiology and by comparison with Proclus’ naturalistic doctrine, which is characterised in a theological sense. Like Galen, Proclus and Damascius reject the autonomistic and mechanistic conception of nature, and to varying degrees they are critical of Aristotelian naturalism and psychology. Instead, the three thinkers considered propose an interpretation of natural phenomena that is (...) firmly centred on the causal and finalist function of the principles governing the physical domain. In particular, it is emphasised that, in the case of the two Neoplatonists studied, this aetiological and teleological approach to physical research is transformed into a structured metaphysical theorisation of causality that transcends the empirical realm. (shrink)

Resumen: Entre los proverbios que Aristóteles utiliza como ejemplos en la Retórica, una fórmula ha dejado particularmente perplejos a los editores y comentaristas del texto: “es vergonzosísimo no tener perro”. Se han propuesto diferentes explicaciones del significado que podría tener este dicho común y, de ahí, del argumento de Aristóteles en este pasaje. Ninguna es completamente satisfactoria. Proponemos entender el significado de este dicho, a partir del uso popular del término κύων, “perro”, en la poesía erótica tardía y en la (...) comedia clásica, que asocian al perro con el sexo masculino. -- Abstract: Among the proverbs that Aristotle uses as examples in the Rhetoric, one formula has perplexed editors and commentators of the text: “it is most shameful not to have a dog”. Different explanations have been proposed for the meaning of this common saying and, hence, of Aristotle’s argument in this passage. None of them is entirely satisfactory. I propose to understand the meaning of this proverb from the popular use of the term κύων, “dog”, in late erotic poetry and in classical comedy, which associate the dog with the masculine sexual organ. (shrink)

In seinen Überlegungen zum Regelfolgen erinnert uns der späte Wittgenstein unter anderem daran, dass wir das Befolgen von Regeln und somit jedes Handeln nach Normen zum einen als eine Praxis verstehen sollten, zum anderen aber auch als das Beherrschen einer Technik. Diesen Hinweisen Wittgensteins geht das Buch nach. Als Gesprächspartner stellt es Wittgenstein Aristoteles zur Seite. Denn in dessen Werken finden sich etliche Bemerkungen dazu, wie das Wesen einer Technik oder Kunst (technê) zu verstehen ist und was die Ausübung einer (...) solchen Kunst als eine Praxis charakterisiert. Indem der Autor den Aristotelischen Begriff der Kunst und deren Erwerb nachzeichnet, erreicht er letztlich eine ausführliche Bestimmung des Begriffs der Praxis, mit dessen Hilfe sich die Möglichkeit und Realität normativen Handelns verständlich machen lassen. (shrink)

In this paper, I present three claims belonging to Cavendish's theory of the passions. First, positive and negative passions are species of love and hate. Second, love and hate involve pleasure and pain. Third, pleasure and pain are regular and irregular, where these notions are to be understood in teleological terms. From these commitments, it follows that hate is irregular. I argue that this consequence is a problematic one for Cavendish. After defending my reading through a consideration of Cavendish's reflections (...) on mental health and disorder, I explore ways in which she might revise her commitments to avoid the problem. Throughout the paper, I demonstrate the extent to which Cavendish's theory of the passions draws on Aristotelian and Augustinian ideas that loomed large in late sixteenth‐ and early seventeenth‐century writings on the topic. (shrink)

This book is concerned with Aristotle’s definition of the human capacity for rational thinking (nous) offered in De anima. For Aristotle, nous is the principle, and ultimate explanans, of all the phenomena of human thinking. The book presents an in-depth interpretation of De anima III 4–8 as a single and coherent philosophical argument. More specifically, the book argues for the following views: (i) Rationalism. Humans come to know the world via two fundamentally different cognitive powers: nous and perception. They are (...) fundamentally different cognitive powers because the nature of their corresponding object is fundamentally different; (ii) Essentialism. The human power for thinking is defined as a capacity for directly grasping the essences of everything there is, including itself. It is this very capacity that Aristotle shows to be the principle of all other kinds of human thinking; (iii) Separatism. Human nous is unmixed with the body, has no dedicated bodily organ, and is separable from the body. As a result, it cannot be assimilated to any of the other parts of the soul. While nous belongs to our essence as human beings, it is not part of the natural world; (iv) Embeddedness in the cognitive soul. Human nous is embedded in a cognitive soul. Among other things, this means that the distinctive activity of human nous—thinking—can only take place in the context of a larger set of activities which are common to the body and the soul. (shrink)

I argue that a circa first century B.C./A.D. anonymous epistolary comic novel depicting a fictional interaction between Hippocrates of Cos and Democritus of Abdera contains an insightful imitation of Democritus that can cast light on the historical Democritus’s thought, including his thought on the touchy subject of appropriate and inappropriate laughter. The only thing certain about Democritus’s view of laughter is that he denounced laughter at human misfortune as inappropriate. The later legend of him as laughing at everything and everyone (...) indiscriminately is a later distortion of his view which the author of the comic novel seems concerned to counteract. (shrink)

During the Middle Ages, physicians, philosophers, and theologians developed a complex and rich discourse on the concept of sickness. Illness (infirmitas) was perceived as the natural state of existential imperfection for homo viator, fallen due to sin and impaired in his bodily integrity. Leprosy, smallpox, plague and the other collective diseases that constantly plagued medieval societies prompted reflections on etiology and modes of transmission of epidemics. Building on Galenic teachings, medieval medicine – both Arabic and Latin – delved into the (...) study of fevers. Key concepts in medical pathology, such as the humors, humidum radicale, and spiritus, were assimilated and reinterpreted within philosophical and theological frameworks. The ten contribution collected in this volume explore this rich array of concepts and themes by closely examining the theories and works of prominent and lesser-known figures in medicine, theology, and philosophy active across Latin Christendom, the Islamic context, and the Jewish world: from Augustine to ʿAlī ibn al-ʿAbbas al-Maǧūsī, from Avicenna to Constantine the African, from Maimonides to Albert the Great, from Arnau de Vilanova to Gentile da Foligno, from Henry of Herford to Michele Savonarola. (shrink)

The subject of this article is the exchange of letters (winter 1634) between the French scholar Jean Bourdelot and the Aristotelian philosopher Fortunio Liceti. The letters published in the appendix provide new information on the dissemination of Campanella’s works in France and on the attention paid to his thought in Aristotelian circles.

In this paper I focus on the historiographical fate of Francisco Suárez (1548–1617) and Pedro da Fonseca (1528–1599) in two Iberian journals ran by Jesuits and founded in 1945: the Spanish Pensamiento, and the Portuguese Revista portuguesa de filosofia. I endeavor to show that the discussions of Suárez’s and Fonseca’s ideas on these journal is a two-sided case of constructing the legacies of major figures in late scholasticism, and I emphasize how the demand to identify cultural national heroes intertwines with (...) theoretical and ideological elements, especially the peculiar history of the Iberian Peninsula, and to the historical relationships between Spain and Portugal. With regard to Suárez, the Pensamiento group strives to carve out a specific place for Neo-Suarezianism within Neo-Thomism, also via a substantive reassessment of Suárez’s importance in the history of scholasticism and of philosophy in general. Hence, Suárez’s thought undergoes triumphant reevaluation, which even aims at ousting Aquinas as the ultimate reference of scholasticism, to make Suárez’s Thomism the principal authority of contemporary schools. By contrast, Fonseca remains a rather obscure and neglected figure, dug up by his fellow compatriots on the Revista portuguesa de filosofia, also against this attempt at establishing a Suarezian, Spanish hegemony. (shrink)

This paper examines a parallel between Aristotle’s account of phantasia and contemporary psychological models of working memory, a capacity that enables the temporary maintenance and manipulation of information used in many behaviors. These two capacities, though developed within two distinct scientific paradigms, share a common strategy of psychological explanation, Aristotelian Faculty Psychology. This strategy individuates psychological components by their target-domains and functional roles. Working memory and phantasia result from an attempt to individuate the psychological components responsible for flexible thought and (...) are thus implicated in most of our robust cognitive processes, from reading comprehension to problem solving. We then present two novel objections which suggest that these capacities cannot explain our ability to engage in flexible thought. To escape the resultant impasse, we survey alternatives and argue that most promising strategies depend on identifying the behaviors attributed to intelligent thought and action. (shrink)

I aim to develop a new framework for thinking about several of the key distinctions in play in Kant’s discussions of freedom in relation to reason, particularly the discussions found in the Third Antinomy of the first Critique, the Groundwork, and the second Critique. Kant’s discussions here have seemed at best puzzling and at worst incoherent: in the Third Antinomy and the Groundwork, for example, Kant seems to both affirm and deny that we can have cognition of the freedom of (...) our reason; in the second Critique, he seems to both affirm that we can know that our reason is free (in the ‘fact of reason’) but then also insist that we can only ‘postulate’ that we have the requisite freedom. My aim here will be to develop a novel version of the idea that, at crucial points in these writings, Kant is distinguishing between several different senses of ‘freedom’, and that it is important to keep track of these different senses if we are to avoid ascribing to Kant a contradictory or otherwise incoherent position on freedom, whether across the key Critical writings from the 1780s or even within the same text. The main distinction that I myself will draw attention to is that between what I will call (drawing on Aristotelian traditions) merely practical freedom, on the one hand, and genuinely productive freedom on the other. As will emerge below, the freedom specific to the ‘practical’ use of reason, in the classical sense of ‘practical’, is the freedom that pertains specifically to reason in its determination of our ‘power of choice [Willkür]’, and hence is something whose cause (reason) and effect (choice) both lie entirely within our soul. Productive freedom, on the other hand, is the freedom that pertains (or would pertain) to a causality of reason whose cause (as reason) is in the soul, but whose effect lies outside our soul, in ‘outer’ nature (for Kant: in physical space). (shrink)

Anaxagoras’ theory of the nous constitutes one aspect of his philosophy particularly interesting for Aristotle. However, he maintains a somewhat bivalent position about it: on the one hand, he praises the Presocratic philosopher for putting the nous as the first principle, while on the other, he shows his disappointment. According to him, Anaxagoras’ nous works insufficiently in the universe, but it is also the cause of goodness, indeed it is the Good capitalized. Our goal is to explain how Aristotle was (...) able to develop both types of seemingly inconsistent discourse concerning Anaxagorean nous. Two solutions to this dilemma are offered: even although some teleology exists in Anaxagoras’ philosophy, it is insufficient for Plato and Aristotle; the reception of the thought of Anaxagoras in later authors still before Aristotle furtively associates goodness with nous. (shrink)

Observing certain affinities with Plato’s Alcibiades I , this paper argues that a distinction between care (epimeleia ) of the soul and philosophy as its art (technê ) is reflected in Aristotle’s Protrepticus . On the basis of this distinction, it claims that two notions of philosophy can be distinguished in the Protrepticus : philosophy as epistêmê and philosophy as technê . The former has the function of contemplating the truth of nature, and Aristotle praises it as the natural telos (...) of human beings; whereas philosophy as technê helps nature to accomplish the end it designed for human beings. It emerges that according to Aristotle in the Protrepticus philosophy is the art of making oneself coincide with one’s nature as a human being. (shrink)

(From Wisdom, Love, and Friendship in Ancient Greek Philosophy: Essays in Honor of Daniel Devereux) This paper discusses a table-turning argument from Aristotle's Protrepticus. I argue that it successfully refutes an extreme anti-philosophy position and make some suggestions about the argument's place in the Protrepticus as a whole.

En este artículo se toma en consideración la noción de providencia en Alejandro de Afrodisias, como hito principal de los esfuerzos del aristotelismo para responder a la noción estoica de “destino” o “hado”. Se tienen en cuenta los precedentes aristotélicos sobre este tema, sobre todo el tratado _De mundo_. El aristotelismo siempre ha recalcado la mayor sujeción al poder divino de los cielos respecto del mundo sublunar, pero será Alejandro quien convierta esta providencia primariamente concentrada en el cielo en una (...) “providencia general” en sentido estricto. Ahora bien, si los dioses sólo conocen las especies y no los particulares, entonces es preciso rechazar la interpretación de Sharples. Según él, la concepción de providencia sostenida por Alejandro pretendía responder a una línea de crítica como la de Ático; pero, de acuerdo con Alejandro, los dioses seguirían sin saber la calidad de la conducta humana, luego no se daría satisfacción a las objeciones de Ático. Se finaliza atendiendo al parentesco de la concepción de Alejandro con el medioplatonismo, una semejanza que podría justificar este viraje adoptado por el filósofo peripatético. (shrink)

El siguiente artı́culo intenta defender la tesis de que la distinción aristotélica entre enérgeia y kı́nesis debe ser comprendida de modo intensional (en contraposición a una lectura extensional), tomando como punto de partida su célebre aparición en Met IX 6. Sobre la base de la identificación del problema acerca del cual trata dicho pasaje, se toma en consideración otras apariciones de la distinción en Met IX 8, en la EE, en la EN y en otros textos, en orden a documentar, (...) en primer lugar, la vinculación de la distinción con la noción de érgon y, en segundo lugar, de qué modo dicha vinculación permite una lectura intensional de la distinción. Por último, se ofrece un argumento adicional para dicha lectura considerando la estructura teleológica de la acciones presentada por Aristóteles en EN I 1. (shrink)

Freiwilligkeit, personale Identität (im Sinne eines harmonisch verfassten und stabilen Selbst) und epistemische Gewissheit sind bei den meisten antiken Philosophieschulen untrennbar miteinander verbunden und garantieren im Rahmen einer als Lebenskunst verstandenen Philosophie das Glück. Im Anlehnung an Überlegungen bei Aristoteles und dem zeitgenössischen Philosophen Peter Bieri analysieren wir, wie Entscheidungen, die zum Zeitpunkt ihres Treffens als bedingt frei und selbstbestimmt wahrgenommen wurden, im Nachhinein vom Han-delnden aufgrund des damals fehlenden Wissens über die Handlungsumstände als unfrei wahrgenommen werden und zu Erfahrungen (...) der Selbstentfremdung führen können. Anknüpfend an Pamela Hieronymis Unterscheidung zwischen zwei Formen der Ausübung mentaler Freiheit zeigen wir anhand von fiktiven Fallbeispielen, wie die Protagonisten trotz epistemischer Ungewissheit zur Autorität über ihren Geist sowie zu einer funktionalen Selbstbeziehung zurückfinden können, und stellen dies in den Kontext einer zeitgenössischen Philosophie als Lebenskunst. (shrink)

In his commentary on Aristotle’s Physics, Nicole Oresme raises a question that he is apparently the first to ask in these terms, in such a context: do all beings have the desire to persevere into being? Before him, this question is not found in any of the medieval commentaries on Aristotle’s Physics. But after him it became canonical until at least the 16th century, since it can be found in Pietro Pomponazzi’s works for example. The novelty here consists in questioning (...) the validity of Averroes’ thesis, in his own commentary on the Physics, according to which all beings have the desire to persist into being, using the Augustinian analysis of voluntary death and suicide. How can we explain that one can freely put an end to his days if he is naturally inclined by a desire for life and even for eternity? Oresme’s solution consists in justifying not only the possibility, but also the moral obligation to accept death under certain conditions. In most cases, we do not really want to die. The desperate man wishes to cancel his misfortune and the heroic man who sacrifices himself for his country wishes to immortalize himself in the memory of other men. From a moral point of view, Nicole Oresme justifies only one case of voluntary death: that of individual sacrifice for the common good. The aim of this paper is to analyze precisely this important turning point in the long history of the notion of conatus in the West by comparing this quaestio from the commentary on the Physics with the glosses that accompany the French translation of the Nicomachean Ethics realised by Oresme at the court of Charles V. (shrink)

Recently, a strong hylomorphic reading of Aristotelian emotions has been put forward, one that allegedly eliminates the problem of causal interaction between soul and body. Taking the presentation of emotions in de An. I 1 as a starting point and basic thread, but relying also on the discussion of Rh. II, I will argue that this reading only takes into account two of the four causes of emotions, and that, if all four of them are included into the picture, then (...) a causal interaction of mind and body remains within Aristotelian emotions, independent of how strongly their hylomorphism is understood. Beyond the discussion with this recent reading, the analysis proposed of the fourfold causal structure of emotions is also intended as a hermeneutical starting point for a comprehensive analysis of particular emotions in Aristotle. Through the different causes Aristotle seems to account for many aspects of the complex phenomenon of emotion, including its physiological causes, its mental causes, and its intentional object. (shrink)

If something could boast of the ancient Greek world for its contribution to this global culture should be the development of philosophical thought. The search for "laws", i.e. the rules governing the nature and binding together, shifted the centre of human thought from the man himself, in the world, in the universe. His search starts with the pre-Socratic philosophical schools and reaches its peak, with the two main proponents of ancient intellect, Plato first and Aristotle's pupil. The contribution of Aristotle (...) particularly could be focused on the attempt to answer the problem of truth. For Aristotle, the search for truth sits in this thing and the intellectual space and the subjective judgment based on reasoning and evidence. Even the metaphysical thought of Aristotle, about God's problem, recommends the apotheosis of reason. The existence of God is a rational truth, it is the reason, and the truth because it fits with the being, the thing. The thought of Aristotle about the existence of God is identified with the existence of God, therefore God exists and proving that it exists. The mind can match things and establish the truth of the existence of God. In this rational metaphysics Aristotelian awareness of the existence of God, in which God, according to Aristotle, moves all other beings, but he remains motionless because it is not material and therefore not have the need of movement, at rival of the Christian philosophy. The Christian philosophy puts the concept of the person, so selfishness and diversity as a means of approach to God through the process of experience. Which is the common point between Aristotle and Christian Philosophy. In their attempt to investigate the relationship of being concerning the ontological beings and the reflection on the Being. (shrink)

У статті досліджується стосунок києво-могилянських філософських курсів XVII–XVIIІ ст. до аристотелівської традиції. Спочатку виставлено критерії, за якими його можна оцінити. Виділено два основних типи критеріїв: суб’єктивні і об’єктивні. Відповідно до перших, могилянці чітко визначали свою філософію як аристотелівську, перипатетичну або ad mentem Aristotelis. Є багато аристотелівських елементів в змісті та в структурі курсів, що задовольняють об’єктивні критерії. Так, логіка і фізика структуровані відповідно до традиційного порядку книг Аристотеля з цієї тематики. Всі основні концепти (ens, essentia і existentia; actus і potentia; (...) materia і forma; чотири причини; 10 категорій тощо), на які спираються могилянські професори, походять від Аристотеля. У статті доводиться, що аристотелівські елементи прийшли в могилянські курси через схоластичну традицію, насамперед з єзуїтських філософських курсів того часу. Однак в окремих випадках, як-от лекціях Теофана Прокоповича, можна помітити глибшу обізнаність з творами Аристотеля. (shrink)

This paper consists in the Spanish translation of a manuscript by Franz Brentano, where he deals with “The Method of Study of Aristotle and, More Generally, the Method of Historical Research in Philosophical Field”. In these pages, Brentano challenges the Aristotelian studies of his time by criticizing the approach followed by E. Zeller and other scholars. Meanwhile, he suggests some hermeneutical rules in order to interpret Aristotle in the right way. The core of his proposal is the use of philosophical (...) hermeneutics, that is, the interpreter should philosophize following the Aristotelian arguments, like the Peripatetics used to do. In his introduction to the text by Brentano, the Spanish translator also recommends a new chronology for the manuscript, i.e. not much later than 1883. Complete title: «Franz Brentano: Sobre el método en los estudios aristotélicos y sobre el método de la investigación histórica en ámbito filosófico en general». Original title: Franz Brentano, «Zur Methode aristotelischen Studien, und zur Methode geschichtlicher Forschung auf philosophischem Gebiet überhaupt», in: 'Über Aristoteles. Nachgelassene Aufsätze', edited by Rolf George, Hamburg: Meiner, 1986, pp. 7-20. (shrink)

No livro I da Ethica Eudemia, Aristóteles dedica um capítulo a considerações acerca de seu método. No entanto, analisando passagens de outros tratados do autor, é possível concluir que há algo comum que perpassa as diversas considerações acerca de seu método, a saber: que o ponto de partida de toda investigação é dado pelo que é mais cognoscível a nós, e todo o procedimento de investigação visa chegar ao que é mais cognoscível em si mesmo – o conhecimento estrito do (...) objeto, que inclui compreender suas causas. O objetivo deste trabalho é tentar compreender como esse procedimento acontece na investigação moral, que opera no âmbito do discurso e, portanto, das definições. Para isso, pretendemos analisar como acontece a passagem da análise do que é dado na experiência em direção ao conhecimento de suas causas, que é próprio de outros tratados aristotélicos, para a análise das opiniões vagas e imprecisas em direção às definições estritas com as quais a Ethica Eudemia pretende operar. (shrink)

Franz C. Brentano, 'La psicología de Aristóteles, con especial atención a la doctrina del entendimiento agente. Seguida de un apéndice sobre la actividad del Dios aristotélico'. Traducción y presentación de David Torrijos Castrillejo. Madrid, Ediciones Universidad San Dámaso, 2015, ISBN: 978-84-15027-81-2, xix + 344 pp. Título original: 'Die Psychologie des Aristoteles insbesondere seine Lehre vom ΝΟΥΣ ΠΟΙΗΤΙΚΟΣ. Nebst einer Beilage über das Wirken des Aristotelischen Gottes'. Mainz: Franz Kirchheim, 1867.

El artículo propone una serie de comentarios a propósito de la noción de Phrónesis, el carácter del estudio es introductorio y prevé esclarecer considerandos aristotélicos respecto a la noción, librándola de interpretaciones erróneas.