Aristotelian

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
American Heritage Dictionary:

Ar·is·to·te·li·an

Top
also Ar·is·to·te·le·an (ăr'ĭ-stə-tē'lē-ən, -tēl'yən, ə-rĭs'tə-) pronunciation
adj.
Of or relating to Aristotle or to his philosophy.

n.
  1. A follower of Aristotle or his teachings.
  2. A person whose thinking and methods tend to be empirical, scientific, or commonsensical.
Aristotelianism Ar'is·to·te'li·an·ism n.

Aristotelian [a‐ris‐tŏ‐tee‐li‐ăn], belonging to or derived from the works of the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384, –322 BCE), the most important of all ancient philosophers in his influence on medieval science and logic, and on literary theory since the Renaissance. In his Poetics, Aristotle saw poetry in terms of the imitation or mimesis of human actions, and accordingly regarded the plot or mythos as the basic principle of coherence in any literary work, which must have a beginning, a middle, and an end. Since the Renaissance, his name has been associated most often with his concepts of tragic catharsis, anagnorisis, and unity of action (see unities). The Chicago critics have been regarded as Aristotelian in the renewed emphasis they gave to the importance of plot in literature.

Encyclopedia of Judaism:

Aristotelianism

Top

The works of Aristotle (the fourth cent. BCE Greek philosopher) in Arabic translation began to exert a major influence on Jewish thought from the mid-12th century, displacing Neoplatonism. Known to Jews and Moslems alike as "the philosopher," Aristotle was described by Maimonides as having "reached the highest degree of intellectual perfection open to man, barring only the still higher degree of prophetic inspiration." Aristotelianism is found in the 12th century writings of Abraham Ibn Daud and continued to shape Jewish philosophical thinking through the mid-16th century. In the 13th-14th century, an anti-intellectual countermovement arose, composed of traditionalist and kabbalistic critics, including the esteemed Ḥasdai Crescas.

From the ninth century and during the Golden Age of Spanish Jewry, Jews living in North Africa and Moslem Europe had access to Aristotelian literature through abbreviated though accurate Arabic translations, which became available after the 12th century in Hebrew translations by Jews living in Christian Europe. Jews also played an important role in their translation into Latin. Generally, Aristotelian philosophy was wholeheartedly accepted by Jewish medieval thinkers because of its pure, less anthropomorphic God-concept. Its theories of the eternity of the universe and of God as the passive, unmoved Mover, however, were often rejected as they contradicted the traditional Jewish understanding of an active, sustaining Creator.

The Arabic philosopher Al-Farabi's tenth-century work, The Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle, served not only as a basic orientation for Jews and Moslems of his generation, but influenced the works of Maimonides 200 years later. Maimonides, the outstanding Jewish Aristotelian, attempted to synthesize biblical revelations and Aristotelianism. Although Aristotle's reasoned arguments were used scientifically, demonstrating such religious doctrines as the existence of God and God's unity, Maimonides concluded that Judaism's traditional position of creation ex nihilo had to be derived from prophetic faith alone (Guide 2:15). Motivated by his belief that miracles were possible only if built into the original Divine order of the world, Maimonides rejected the Aristotelian concept of the eternity of the universe, i.e., creation as an eternal process and not as a genesis of prime matter. In contrast, however, he negated the traditional notion of individual providence in favor of Aristotle's, claiming that Divine intervention operates on behalf of the human species rather than individual. His successors suggested solutions to reconcile religion and philosophy but Maimonides dominated over the next three centuries.

Hebrew translations of the Arabic commentaries of Averroes (1126-1198) served as the Aristotelian source for Jewish thinkers after the 12th century. Some of them, such as Isaac Albalag, objected to the Maimonidean attempts to rely on the conventional account of the creation to refute Aristotle's proofs of the eternity of the world.

Aristotle is one of the few non-Jews to figure in Jewish legend. Josephus records traditions that he was affected by contact with Jews (Josephus, Apion 1:176-182). Several medieval and Renaissance Jewish writers claim that Aristotle actually converted to Judaism and one story even tells of his natural Jewish origin from the tribe of Benjamin. A number of apocryphal notes ascribed to Aristotle brought him esteem in kabbalistic circles.


Top

Aristotle's influence originally survived through his own school, the Lyceum. His works were collected and edited by Andronicus of Rhodes, and commentaries continued until Justinian closed the pagan schools in ad 529. Avicenna and Averroes contributed to the rebirth of Aristotelian studies in the West, which after mild attempts at suppression at the beginning of the thirteenth century burgeoned until Aristotle became ‘the philosopher’, the fountainhead and authority for the great medievals such as Albert the Great and especially Aquinas. However, the Schoolmen were more interested in defending the truth of Aristotle's dynamical and physical system, which they saw as substantially compatible with Christianity, than in promoting the empirical and scientific method that he championed, with the result that to the scientific revolution of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Aristotle was regarded as little but an obstacle: the author of fossilized and dogmatic scholastic nonsense. Even at this low point Aristotle's moral and psychological insights fared better than his metaphysical and physical speculations, while his logic, although generally regarded as superseded by modern propositional and predicate calculus, is still admired and trawled for substantive insights.

Aristotelianism in the early modern period was the philosophy taught in the schools, typically in the collegiate years preparatory to a bachelor's degree. Thus Aristotelianism and Scholasticism were synonymous at the time, and one cannot talk about Aristotelianism without referring to the important changes in pedagogy that were initiated then. Many colleges and universities reorganized and standardized their curriculum; new teaching orders, such as the Oratory in France (founded 1564; established in France 1613) and the Doctrinaires in France and Italy (founded 1592), were instituted; and the Society of Jesus, which became a very powerful force in education, was established (in 1534), with the aim of using education to counter the effects of the Reformation.

Education during the first half of the seventeenth century became fairly uniform. Students took four or five years of humanities (French, Latin, and Greek language and literature) followed by a year of rhetoric and then the collegiate curriculum, that is, two years of philosophy. The latter was an Aristotelian-based program of logic, ethics, physics, and metaphysics; it was thought necessary as preparation for the higher faculties of medicine, law, and theology. Jesuits covered the same collegiate curriculum in three years with the addition of a course in mathematics. Oratorians followed that pattern and taught a broadly Aristotelian set of philosophy courses. Perhaps because of the propensity of their founder, Pierre de Bérulle, for Platonic thought, the Aristotelianism of the Oratory differed slightly from that of the Jesuits and Doctrinaires. The Jesuits officially leaned toward Thomism, the version of Aristotelian philosophy propounded by St. Thomas Aquinas (1224 or 1225–1274) and his followers, though in practice they mixed their Thomism with other kinds of Scholastic thought, while the Doctrinaires seem to have taught Thomism exclusively.

In the Constitutions of the Society of Jesus, Ignatius of Loyola (1491–1556), founder of the Society, recommended that Jesuits follow the doctrines of Saint Thomas in theology and those of Aristotle in logic, natural philosophy, ethics, and metaphysics. After Loyola, the official position of the Society was further specified; Jesuits were supposed to teach "Aristotle and the true philosophy," interpreted as Thomism. With the succession of Claudio Aquaviva as the fifth general of the Society (1581–1615), these issues took on a new vigor. The Society standardized its curriculum during this time. The Jesuits undertook extraordinary pedagogical discussions, ultimately leading to their ratio studiorum (uniform course of studies). The aim of this standardization was to enable Jesuits to propound a single philosophy that would maintain the Catholic faith; as Aquaviva said: "The primary goal in teaching should be to strengthen the faith and to develop piety. Therefore, no one shall teach anything not in conformity with the Church and received traditions, or that can diminish the vigor of the faith or the ardor of a solid piety."

Together with these pedagogical innovations there was an explosion of Scholastic manuals. Among the widely read textbook authors at the time were the Coimbrans and Francisco Toletus. The Coimbrans (the Conimbricenses) were professors at the Jesuit College at Coimbra (Portugal), who issued a series of encyclopedic commentaries on Aristotle's works. Chief among them was Pedro da Fonseca, who wrote his own commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics. Toletus was a professor at the Jesuit Collegio Romano who also published commentaries on Aristotle's works. The Coimbrans wrote volumes by committee, presenting the works of Aristotle that were taught in the curriculum; they followed the model of the great medieval commentaries, each volume treating a specific text (Physics, On the Soul, On the Heavens, etc.), but with an elaborate (post-Renaissance) scholarly apparatus, giving both Aristotle's Greek text and its Latin translation, as well as Latin paraphrases and quaestiones, the resolution of questions relevant to the text under discussion. Other textbook writers generally followed this pattern, although textbooks like those of Toletus omitted the Greek versions of Aristotle. Ultimately, the Scholastic textbook even omitted Aristotle's text itself. Eustachius a Sancto Paulo, in his Summa Philosophiae Quadripartita (Sum of philosophy in four parts, 1609), simply arranged the quaestiones in the order in which the curriculum would have presented them, doing so for all the Aristotelian sciences within the frame of the whole philosophy curriculum in a single volume. As their names generally indicated, these works were usually divided into four parts: ethics and logic, physics and metaphysics. However, the Philosophy (1644) by the Protestant Pierre du Moulin (whose logic text was also translated into English), was a three-part textbook, metaphysics having been omitted, while the Philosophy (1642) of Léonard Marandé added a fifth part: theology.

While the form of Scholastic teaching was fairly stable, its content was not. Aristotle's philosophy dominated the schools in name, but the early modern era also witnessed a growing dissatisfaction with Aristotelian concepts. In fact, the differences among Aristotelians became so widespread that it is difficult to categorize thinkers as Aristotelians based on their doctrines alone. Scholars often regarded themselves as Aristotelians even when they departed from properly Aristotelian thought. One need only consider the case of Théophraste Bouju, whose 1614 textbook was subtitled: "All of it by demonstration and Aristotle's authority, with explanations of his doctrine by Aristotle himself." Despite the subtitle, Bouju denied in his textbook that there is a sphere of fire and an absolute division between the sublunary and superlunary world. These, most would agree, were essential Aristotelian doctrines; dispensing with them would require one to rework substantially the Aristotelian theory of the four elements, of natural and violent motion, and of the heterogeneity of the sublunary and superlunary world. Many other theses that became canonical with later Aristotelians, such as the doctrine of substantial forms, also found early modern Scholastic critics. There were even textbook writers who proclaimed the compatibility of Aristotelian philosophy and atomism. Certainly, late Scholasticism was not "monolithic," although such pejorative labels have been applied to it from the beginning.

Of course, not everyone thought that the differences among Aristotelians were significant. For example, René Descartes (1596–1650) asserted: "As for scholastic philosophy, I do not hold it as difficult to refute on account of the diversity of the scholastics' opinions, for one can easily upset all the foundations about which they are in agreement among themselves; and that accomplished, all their particular disputes would appear inept." For the Schoolmen, departures from properly Aristotelian doctrines were generally presented as elaborations of Aristotle's intentions; outside the Schools they were often cited as objections to them. The situation naturally lent itself to rhetorical excesses on both sides. By the middle of the seventeenth century, accusations of in-fighting and philosophical inconsistency among the Schoolmen were near routine. Coinciding with this rising criticism, rival systems, such as those of Descartes, Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655), and Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), were consciously developed as alternatives to traditional interpretations of Aristotelian physics and metaphysics. As a result, there were also thinkers who set out to mitigate the differences between the rival systems and others who self-consciously resolved to be eclectic, that is, to pick out what is best from the new and old philosophies. Naturally, the new philosophies also remained indebted, in varying degrees, to the tradition from which they attempted to break.

Bibliography

Ariew, Roger. Descartes and the Last Scholastics. Ithaca, N.Y., 1999.

Brockliss, L. W. B. French Higher Education in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries: A Cultural History. Oxford and New York, 1987.

Dear, Peter. Mersenne and the Learning of the Schools. Ithaca, N.Y., 1988.

Des Chene, Dennis. Physiologia: Natural Philosophy in Late Aristotelian and Cartesian Thought. Ithaca, N.Y., 1996.

Feingold, Mordechai, ed. Jesuit Science and the Republic of Letters. Cambridge, Mass., 2003.

—ROGER ARIEW

Random House Word Menu:

categories related to 'Aristotelianism'

Top
Random House Word Menu by Stephen Glazier
For a list of words related to Aristotelianism, see:
  • Schools, Doctrines, and Movements - Aristotelianism: practical, empirical philosophy of Aristotle, highly influential throughout course of Western history (Greece, 4th c. B.C.)


Top

Aristotelianism (play /ˌærɨstəˈtliənɨzəm/ ARR-i-stə-TEE-li-ə-niz-əm) is a tradition of philosophy that takes its defining inspiration from the work of Aristotle. The works of Aristotle were initially defended by the members of the Peripatetic school, and, later on, by the Neoplatonists, who produced many commentaries on Aristotle's writings. In the Islamic world, the works of Aristotle were translated into Arabic, and under philosophers such as Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi, Avicenna, and Averroes, Aristotelianism became a major part of early Islamic philosophy. Although some knowledge of Aristotle's logical works was known to western Europe, it wasn't until the Latin translations of the 12th century that the works of Aristotle and his Arabic commentators became widely available. Scholars such as Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas interpreted and systematized Aristotle's works in accordance with Christian theology.

Contents

History

Ancient Greece

The original followers of Aristotle were the members of the Peripatetic school. The most prominent members of the school after Aristotle were Theophrastus and Strato of Lampsacus, who both continued Aristotle's researches. During the Roman era the school concentrated on preserving and defending his work.[1] The most important figure in this regard was Alexander of Aphrodisias who commentated on Aristotle's writings. With the rise of Neoplatonism in the 3rd century, Peripateticism as an independent philosophy came to an end, but the Neoplatonists sought to incorporate Aristotle's philosophy within their own system, and produced many commentaries on Aristotle.

Islamic world

In the Abbasid Empire, many foreign works were translated into Arabic, large libraries were constructed, and scholars were welcomed.[2] Under the caliphs Harun al-Rashid and his son Al-Ma'mun, the House of Wisdom in Baghdad flourished. Christian scholar Hunayn ibn Ishaq (809–873) was placed in charge of the translation work by the caliph. In his lifetime, Ishaq translated 116 writings, including works by Plato and Aristotle, into Syriac and Arabic.[3][4] Al-Kindi (801–873) was the first of the Muslim Peripatetic philosophers, and is known for his efforts to introduce Greek and Hellenistic philosophy to the Arab world.[5] He incorporated Aristotelian and Neoplatonist thought into an Islamic philosophical framework. This was an important factor in the introduction and popularization of Greek philosophy in the Muslim intellectual world.[6]

The philosopher Al-Farabi (872–950) had great influence on science and philosophy for several centuries, and was widely regarded to be second only to Aristotle in knowledge (alluded to by his title of "the Second Teacher") in his time. His work, aimed at synthesis of philosophy and Sufism, paved the way for the work of Avicenna (980–1037).[7] Avicenna was one of the main interpreters of Aristotle.[8] The school of thought he founded became known as Avicennism, which was built on ingredients and conceptual building blocks which are largely Aristotelian and Neoplatonist.[9]

At the western end of the Mediterranean Sea, during the reign of Al-Hakam II (961 to 976) in Córdoba, a massive translation effort was undertaken, and many books were translated into Arabic. Averroes (1126–1198), who spent much of his life in Cordoba and Seville, was especially distinguished as a commentator of Aristotle. He often wrote two or three different commentaries on the same work, and some 38 commentaries by Averroes on the works of Aristotle have been identified.[10] Although his writings had only marginal impact in Islamic countries, his works would eventually have a huge impact in the Latin West,[10] and would lead to the school of thought known as Averroism.

Europe

Although some knowledge of Aristotle seems to have lingered on in the ecclesiastical centres of western Europe after the fall of the Roman empire, by the ninth century nearly all that was known of Aristotle consisted of Boethius's commentaries on the Organon, and a few abridgments made by Latin authors of the declining empire, Isidore of Seville and Martianus Capella.[11] From that time until the end of the eleventh century, little progress is apparent in Aristotelian knowledge.[11]

The renaissance of the 12th century saw a major search by European scholars for new learning. James of Venice, who probably spent some years in Constantinople, translated Aristotle's Posterior Analytics from Greek into Latin in the mid-twelfth century,[12] thus making the complete Aristotelian logical corpus, the Organon, available in Latin for the first time. Scholars travelled to areas of Europe that once had been under Muslim rule and still had substantial Arabic-speaking populations. From central Spain, which had come under Christian rule in the eleventh century, scholars produced many of the Latin translations of the 12th century. The most productive of these translators was Gerard of Cremona,[13] (c. 1114–1187), who translated 87 books,[14] which included many of the works of Aristotle such as his Posterior Analytics, Physics, On the Heavens, On Generation and Corruption, and Meteorology. Michael Scot (c. 1175–1232) translated Averroes' commentaries on the scientific works of Aristotle.[15]

Aristotle's physical writings began to be discussed openly, and at a time when Aristotle's method was permeating all theology, these treatises were sufficient to cause his prohibition for heterodoxy in the Condemnations of 1210–1277.[11] In the first of these, in Paris in 1210, it was stated that "neither the books of Aristotle on natural philosophy or their commentaries are to be read at Paris in public or secret, and this we forbid under penalty of excommunication."[16] However, despite further attempts to restrict the teaching of Aristotle, by 1270 the ban on Aristotle's natural philosophy was ineffective.[17]

William of Moerbeke (c. 1215–1286) undertook a complete translation of the works of Aristotle or, for some portions, a revision of existing translations. He was the first translator of the Politics (c. 1260) from Greek into Latin. Many copies of Aristotle in Latin then in circulation were assumed to have been influenced by Averroes, who was suspected of being a source of philosophical and theological errors found in the earlier translations of Aristotle. Such claims were without merit, however, as the Alexandrian Aristotelianism of Averroes followed "the strict study of the text of Aristotle, which was introduced by Avicenna, [because] a large amount of traditional Neoplatonism was incorporated with the body of traditional Aristotelianism".[18] Albertus Magnus (c. 1200–1280) was among the first among medieval scholars to apply Aristotle's philosophy to Christian thought. He produced paraphrases of most of the works of Aristotle available to him.[19] He digested, interpreted and systematized the whole of Aristotle's works, gleaned from the Latin translations and notes of the Arabian commentators, in accordance with Church doctrine. His efforts resulted in the formation of a Christian reception of Aristotle in the Western Europe.[19] Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), the pupil of Albertus Magnus, wrote a dozen commentaries on the works of Aristotle.[20] Thomas was emphatically Aristotelian, he adopted Aristotle's analysis of physical objects, his view of place, time and motion, his proof of the prime mover, his cosmology, his account of sense perception and intellectual knowledge, and even parts of his moral philosophy.[20] The philosophical school that arose as a legacy of the work of Thomas Aquinas was known as Thomism, and was especially influential among the Dominicans, and later, the Jesuits.[20]

Modern era

After retreating under criticism from modern natural philosophers, the distinctively Aristotelian idea of teleology was transmitted through Wolff and Kant to Hegel, who applied it to history as a totality.[citation needed] Although this project was criticized by Trendelenburg and Brentano as un-Aristotelian,[citation needed] Hegel’s influence is now often said to be responsible for an important Aristotelian influence upon Marx.[21] Postmodernists, in contrast, reject Aristotelianism’s claim to reveal important theoretical truths.[22] In this, they follow Heidegger’s critique of Aristotle as the greatest source of the entire tradition of Western philosophy.

Contemporary Aristotelianism

Aristotelianism is understood by its proponents as critically developing Plato’s theories.[23] Recent Aristotelian ethical and ‘practical’ philosophy, such as that of Gadamer and McDowell, is often premised upon a rejection of Aristotelianism’s traditional metaphysical or theoretical philosophy.[citation needed] From this viewpoint, the early modern tradition of political republicanism, which views the res publica, public sphere or state as constituted by its citizens’ virtuous activity, can appear thoroughly Aristotelian.[citation needed]

The contemporary Aristotelian philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre is specially famous for helping to revive virtue ethics in his book After Virtue. MacIntyre revises Aristotelianism with the argument that the highest temporal goods, which are internal to human beings, are actualized through participation in social practices. He opposes Aristotelianism to the managerial institutions of capitalism and its state, and to rival traditions—including the philosophies of Hume, Kant, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche—that reject its idea of essentially human goods and virtues and instead legitimize capitalism. Therefore, on MacIntyre’s account, Aristotelianism is not identical with Western philosophy as a whole; rather, it is "the best theory so far, [including] the best theory so far about what makes a particular theory the best one."[24] Politically and socially, it has been characterized as a newly 'revolutionary Aristotelianism'. This may be contrasted with the more conventional, apolitical and effectively conservative uses of Aristotle by, for example, Gadamer and McDowell.[25] Other important contemporary Aristotelian theorists include Fred D. Miller, Jr.[26] in politics and Rosalind Hursthouse in ethics.[27]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ Furley, David (2003), From Aristotle to Augustine: Routledge History of Philosophy, 2, Routledge
  2. ^ Gaston Wiet, Baghdad: Metropolis of the Abbasid Caliphate Retrieved 2010-04-16
  3. ^ Opth: Azmi, Khurshid. "Hunain bin Ishaq on Opthalmic Surgery." Bulletin of the Indian Institute of History of Medicine 26 (1996): 69–74. Web. 29 Oct. 2009
  4. ^ Lindberg, David C. The Beginnings of Western Science: Islamic Science. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 2007. Print.
  5. ^ Klein-Frank, F. Al-Kindi. In Leaman, O & Nasr, H (2001). History of Islamic Philosophy. London: Routledge. p 165
  6. ^ Felix Klein-Frank (2001) Al-Kindi, pages 166–167. In Oliver Leaman & Hossein Nasr. History of Islamic Philosophy. London: Routledge.
  7. ^ "Avicenna (Ibn Sina) (c.980–1037)". The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/avicenna/. Retrieved 2007-07-13. 
  8. ^ "Avicenna (Abu Ali Sina)". Sjsu.edu. http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/Museum/avicen.html. Retrieved 2010-01-19. 
  9. ^ "Avicenna". Encyclopedia Iranica. http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/avicenna-iv. Retrieved 2010-04-14. 
  10. ^ a b Edward Grant, (1996), The foundations of modern science in the Middle Ages, page 30. Cambridge University Press
  11. ^ a b c Auguste Schmolders, History of Arabian Philosophy in The eclectic magazine of foreign literature, science, and art, Volume 46. February 1859
  12. ^ L.D. Reynolds and Nigel G. Wilson, Scribes and Scholars, Oxford, 1974, p. 106.
  13. ^ C. H. Haskins, Renaissance of the Twelfth Century, p. 287. "more of Arabic science passed into Western Europe at the hands of Gerard of Cremona than in any other way."
  14. ^ For a list of Gerard of Cremona's translations see: Edward Grant (1974) A Source Book in Medieval Science, (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Pr.), pp. 35–8 or Charles Burnett, "The Coherence of the Arabic-Latin Translation Program in Toledo in the Twelfth Century," Science in Context, 14 (2001): at 249-288, at pp. 275–281.
  15. ^ Christoph Kann (1993). Bautz, Traugott. ed (in German). Michael Scotus. Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon (BBKL). 5. Herzberg. cols. 1459–1461. ISBN 3-88309-043-3. http://www.bautz.de/bbkl/m/michael_sco.shtml. 
  16. ^ Edward Grant, A Source Book in Medieval Science, page 42 (1974). Harvard University Press
  17. ^ Rubenstein, Richard E. Aristotle's Children: How Christians, Muslims, and Jews Rediscovered Ancient Wisdom and Illuminated the Middle Ages, page 215 (2004). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
  18. ^ Schmölders, Auguste (1859). "‘Essai sur les Ecoles Philosophiques chez les Arabes’ par Auguste Schmölders, (Paris 1842) [Essay on the Schools of Philosophy in Arabia]". In Telford, John; Barber, Benjamin Aquila; Watkinson, William Lonsdale et al (full–text/pdf). The London Quarterly Review. 11. J.A. Sharp. p. 60. http://books.google.com/books?id=CnhIAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA60. "We have said already that the most interesting and important of the Arabian schools is that which was the simple expression of Alexandrian Aristotelianism, the school of Avicenna and Averroes; or, as the Arabians themselves called it par excellence, that of the 'philosophers.' In no material point did they differ from their master, and, therefore, an exposition of their doctrines would be useless to those who know anything of the history of philosophy; but, before the strict study of the text of Aristotle, which was introduced by Avicenna, a large amount of traditional Neo-Platonism was incorporated with the body of traditional Aristotelianism, so as to take them sometimes far astray from their master's track." 
  19. ^ a b Albert the Great entry by Markus Fhrer in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  20. ^ a b c Saint Thomas Aquinas entry by Ralph McInerny in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  21. ^ For example, George E. McCarthy (ed.), Marx and Aristotle: Nineteenth-Century German Social Theory and Classical Antiquity, Although many disagree Rowman & Littlefield, 1992.
  22. ^ For example, Ted Sadler, Heidegger and Aristotle: The Question of Being, Athlone, 1996.
  23. ^ For contrasting examples of this, see Hans-Georg Gadamer, The Idea of the Good in Platonic-Aristotelian Philosophy (trans. P. Christopher Smith), Yale University Press, 1986, and Lloyd P. Gerson, Aristotle and Other Platonists, Cornell University Press, 2005.
  24. ^ Alasdair MacIntyre, 'An Interview with Giovanna Borradori', in Kelvin Knight (ed.), The MacIntyre Reader, Polity Press / University of Notre Dame Press, 1998, p. 264.
  25. ^ Kelvin Knight, Aristotelian Philosophy: Ethics and Politics from Aristotle to MacIntyre, Polity Press, 2007.
  26. ^ Fred D. Miller, Jr., Nature, Justice, and Rights in Aristotle's Politics, Oxford University Press, 1997.
  27. ^ Rosalind Hursthouse, On Virtue Ethics, Oxford University Press, 1999.

Further reading

  • Chappell, Timothy (ed.), Values and Virtues: Aristotelianism in Contemporary Ethics, Oxford University Press, 2006.
  • Ferrarin, Alfredo, Hegel and Aristotle, Cambridge University Press, 2001.
  • Kenny, Anthony, Essays on the Aristotelian Tradition, Oxford University Press, 2001.
  • Knight, Kelvin, Aristotelian Philosophy: Ethics and Politics from Aristotle to MacIntyre, Polity Press, 2007. ISBN 978-0-7456-1976-7.
  • Knight, Kelvin & Paul Blackledge (eds.), Revolutionary Aristotelianism: Ethics, Resistance and Utopia, Lucius & Lucius (Stuttgart, Germany), 2008.
  • Lobkowicz, Nicholas, Theory and Practice: History of a Concept from Aristotle to Marx, University of Notre Dame Press, 1967.
  • MacIntyre, Alasdair, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, University of Notre Dame Press, 1984 / Duckworth, 1985 (2nd edn.).
  • MacIntyre, Alasdair, Whose Justice? Which Rationality?, University of Notre Dame Press / Duckworth, 1988.
  • MacIntyre, Alasdair, Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry: Encyclopaedia, Genealogy, and Tradition, University of Notre Dame Press / Duckworth, 1990.
  • MacIntyre, Alasdair, ‘The Theses on Feuerbach: A Road Not Taken’, in Kelvin Knight (ed.), The MacIntyre Reader, University of Notre Dame Press / Polity Press, 1998.
  • MacIntyre, Alasdair, Dependent Rational Animals: Why Human Beings Need the Virtues, Open Court / Duckworth, 1999.
  • MacIntyre, Alasdair, ‘Natural Law as Subversive: The Case of Aquinas’ and ‘Rival Aristotles: 1. Aristotle Against Some Renaissance Aristotelians; 2. Aristotle Against Some Modern Aristotelians’, in MacIntyre, Ethics and Politics: Selected Essays volume 2, Cambridge University Press, 2006.
  • Moraux, Paul, Der Aristotelismus bei den Griechen, Von Andronikos bis Alexander von Aphrodisias: Vol. I: Die Renaissance des Aristotelismus im I. Jh.v. Chr. (1973); Vol. II: Der Aristotelismus im I. und II. Jh.n. Chr. (1984); Vol. III: Alexander von Aphrodisias (2001) – Edited by Jürgen Wiesner, with a chapter on Ethics by Robert W. Sharples.
  • Riedel, Manfred (ed.), Rehabilitierung der praktischen Philosophie, Rombach, volume 1, 1972; volume 2, 1974.
  • Ritter, Joachim, Metaphysik und Politik: Studien zu Aristoteles und Hegel, Suhrkamp, 1977.
  • Schrenk, Lawrence P. (ed.), Aristotle in Late Antiquity, Catholic University of America Press, 1994.
  • Sharples, R. W. (ed.), Whose Aristotle? Whose Aristotelianism?, Ashgate, 2001.
  • Shute, Richard, On the History of the Process by Which the Aristotelian Writings Arrived at Their Present Form, Arno Press, 1976 (originally 1888).
  • Sorabji, Richard (ed.), Aristotle Transformed: The Ancient Commentators and Their Influence, Duckworth, 1990.
  • Stocks, John Leofric, Aristotelianism, Harrap, 1925.
  • Veatch, Henry B., Rational Man: A Modern Interpretation of Aristotelian Ethics, Indiana University Press, 1962.

External links


Post a question - any question - to the WikiAnswers community:

Copyrights:

Mentioned in

kinesis (philosophy)
prime matter (philosophy)
Jacopo Zabarella (philosophy)
substantial form (philosophy)
Aristotelian logic (Aristotle's deductive method of logic)