Peitho. Examina Antiqua, nr 1(3), 2012
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing Peitho. Examina Antiqua, nr 1(3), 2012 by Subject "Aristotle"
Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Aristotle’s Method of Understanding the First Principles of Natural Things in the Physics I.1(Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Filozofii UAM, 2012) Mouzala, Melinga G.This paper presents Aristotle’s method of understanding the first principles of natural things in the Physics I.1 and analyzes the three stages of which this method consists. In the Physics I.1, Aristotle suggests that the natural proper route which one has to follow in order to find out the first principles of natural things is to proceed from what is clearer and more knowable to us to what is more knowable and clear by nature. In the Physics I.1, the terms καθόλου (universal) and καθ΄ ἕκαστα (particular) are not used in their usual meaning (e.g., the meaning which the same terms have in the Posterior Analytics I. 2). This paper examines the Physics I.1 in comparison with the Posterior Analytics II. 19 in order to elucidate the meaning of καθόλου in the first chapter of Aristotle’s Physics. Furthermore, it reaches the conclusion that the structure of the natural world to which we belong determines the structure and the form of our knowledge. On the one hand, natural things are composite and, on the other hand, perception is involved in the initial grasping of natural things as composites. Thus, since perceptual knowledge is more accessible to us than any other kind of knowledge it is natural to reach knowledge of simple things, i.e., of the principles, starting our inquiry with the composites.Item Le denominazioni della Metafisica e della sua scienza nella filosofia tardoantica(Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Filozofii UAM, 2012) Napoli, ValerioIn late antiquity, in the context of the jagged tradition of Neo-Platonism, Aristotle’s Metaphysics and the specific science that is traced out in it are indicated with the current denominations of meta ta physika and theologikē pragmateia, which are seen as consistent with one another and closely interconnected. In this connection, the Metaphysics, in the wake of previous philosophical readings, is considered as a treatise on “theological science” — the most elevated among the sciences — and the denomination meta ta physika is seen in a specifically theological sense. According to a widespread Neo-Platonic reading, the science thematized in the Metaphysics is “metaphysics” in that it is theological science, an epistemic discourse on divine realities, which, within the ordo rerum, transcend the physical ones, and, therefore, according to the ordo cognoscendi, must be studied after the latter.Item L’ Art rhétorique d’Aristote, une oeuvre pour notre temps?(Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Filozofii UAM, 2012) Motte, AndréHaving discussed some political and philosophical stakes of the Greeks’ invention of the rhetorical art, the present research aims to show the great originality of Aristotle’s treatise in comparison to his precursors. Subsequently, the article illustrates the amazing scientific relevance of Aristotle’s work for the French‑speaking world in the past half a century. Finally, the paper poses the question whether its underlying concepts can nowadays be of any significance from a practical point of view.Item Tra Ramo, Alessandro di Afrodisia e Averroè. Il commento di Francesco Vimercato (ca. 1512–ca. 1580) al libro XII della Metafisica di Aristotele(Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Filozofii UAM, 2011) Facca, DaniloWhat kind of causality does the Aristotelian Prime Mover exert on the heaven? Who “loves” the Prime Mover? Renaissance peripatetic philosopher, Francesco Vimercato, a “royal” teacher of “Greek and Latin philosophy” in Paris during the forties and the fifties of the 16th century tried to resolve these traditional puzzles that resulted from the exegesis of the Metaphysics XII, 6–7. His solution appears to be innovative, if compared to the ancient and the medieval ones. It seems partially to prefigure the last two decades’ interpretations of Aristotelian “theology”.Item Z recepcji Retoryki Arystotelesa w Bizancjum(Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Filozofii UAM, 2012) Cichocka, HelenaThe paper deals with the reception of Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric (Rhet. I 1355b26–27) in several Byzantine commentators of Hermogenes’ and Aphthonius’ treatises. A justification of critical interpretation of this definition is to be found in the commentaries of Troilus and Athanasius (4th/5th century) as well as Sopatros (6th century) and Doxapatres (11th century), Maximus Planudes (13th/14th century) and several anonymous commentators. The Byzantine tradition has found Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric to be all too theoretical and insufficiently connected to practical activity, which Byzantium identified with political life.Item Zaginione pismo Arystotelesa O filozofii(Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Filozofii UAM, 2012) Pacewicz, ArturThis article offers a Polish translation of Aristotle’s treatise, On Philosophy, of which only certain fragments and testimonies have been preserved. The translation is supplied with an introduction presenting the history of various interpretations and reconstructions of Aristotle’s work.Item ΑΝΑΛΥΣΙΣ ΠΕΡΙ ΤΑ ΣΧΗΜΑΤΑ. Restoring Aristotle’s Lost Diagrams of the Syllogistic Figures(Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Filozofii UAM, 2012) Wesoły, MarianThe article examines the relevance of Aristotle’s analysis that concerns the syllogistic figures. On the assumption that Aristotle’s analytics was inspired by the method of geometric analysis, we show how Aristotle used the three terms (letters), when he formulated the three syllogistic figures. So far it has not been appropriately recognized that the three terms — the major, the middle and the minor one — were viewed by Aristotle syntactically and predicatively in the form of diagrams. Many scholars have misunderstood Aristotle in that in the second and third figure the middle term is outside and that in the second figure the major term is next to the middle one, whereas in the third figure it is further from it. By means of diagrams, we have elucidated how this perfectly accords with Aristotle's planar and graphic arrangement. In the light of these diagrams, one can appropriately capture the definition of syllogism as a predicative set of terms. Irrespective of the tricky question concerning the abbreviations that Aristotle himself used with reference to these types of predication, the reconstructed figures allow us better to comprehend the reductions of syllogism to the first figure. We assume that the figures of syllogism are analogous to the figures of categorical predication, i.e., they are specific syntactic and semantic models. Aristotle demanded certain logical and methodological competence within analytics, which reflects his great commitment and contribution to the field.