0
Aristotle
The Greek philosopher and teacher who formulated the basis for much of today's modern science. This category is designed to collect questions about his life, methods, and discoveries.
1,843 Questions
Is there a Christian ultimate reality?
Ultimate reality exists outside religions. There is not a different reality for each religion, only an inner peace and understanding. It is both a religious experience (no matter one's faith) and a personal experience. The only requirement in achieving ultimate reality is belief in and a surrender to a greater power. Meditation is a great way to encounter the Ultimate Reality because it is like the opposite of prayer; instead of talking to God(s), you are listening. As a Christian, I can tell you there is not a "Christian Ultimate Reality" but all Christians can encounter Ultimate Reality.
What is stated above is both self refuting and ridiculous. If there is no ultimate reality, then this turns out to actually be the ultimate reality, so the idea shoots itself in the foot. It is contradictory and therefore necessarily false to say that it is true that there is no ultimate truth. A self refuting statement is one that cannot live up to its own criteria of meaning. Anything you say to me about truth, even if you say there is none, is a claim to truth. You want me to think it is true that there is no truth. I simply can't buy it. Of course there is a Christian ultimate reality. It begins with God himself, who is the source of all things, the foundation upon which everything else rests. The next truth about Christian ultimate reality is that nothing comes from nothing, or out of nothing, nothing comes. Therefore there must be a cause or source for everything. The universe could not have created itself, and so it needs a cause greater than it. All this inner peace and listening in meditation is nonsense if there is no ultimate source of meaning. Since God is that source, he is the ultimate reality, in the biblical, Christian view. Further, we are not perfect and must die, but there either is or is not a "cure" for death, a solution to the problem of "eventual personal extinction." If there is not, then there is no ultimate hope for anyone, let alone humanity. If there is a path to immortality, then there is indeed hope for everyone. Christ is both that path and that hope.
Did Aristotle term clear and ordered thinking classical or reason?
Reason.
Aristotle was a Greek philosopher. He was a student of Plato. Aristotle taught that people should live lives of moderation and use reason in their lives.
What does Plato say about virtue?
Plato says that virtue is wisdom, in whole or in part, so it canâ??t be something weâ??re born with. This statement came after a round of conversations with Meno, discussing exactly what the definition of virtue is.
Aristotle believed that virtue was?
For Aristotle, every person has a character, which comes from the repetition of certain kinds of activities or habits. A virtue is a state of a character. There are two kinds of virtues: intellectual and moral. The purpose of examining virtue is not to understand what virtue is, which is useless, but to become good. A correct action is governed by the rational part of the soul, by correct reason. With respect to moral virtues, they are states that naturally tend to be ruined either by excess or deficiency. He uses a physical analogy to exercise: too little exercise and too much exercise both undermine strength. It is the same with, for example, bravery: too little bravery is being cowardly and afraid of everything whereas too much bravery is being rash and afraid of nothing. The moral mean is not always easy to find. Individuals must not only be rational, but they should also consider that the mean in a specific case is always relative to us as well as defined by reference to reason.
The year that Jesus died is known. He died in the year 33. In fact, not only is year known, the exact date of Nisan 14, 33 is when he died. Nisan was a month on the Jewish Lunar calender that corresponds to late March and early April on our calender. The chronology of Jesus is uncertain, disputed, and perhaps impossible to ascertain definitively based on available evidence. The texts used in chronological reconstruction, the four canonical gospels, provide few clear dates - including the year of Jesus's birth, death, and age at death. (Dates for rulers and high priests are known from other sources). Moreover, the material unique to each gospel further complicates the discernment of one, harmonized chronology. Lastly, some commentators have questioned their historicity (see Historicity of Jesus). One crucial issue is that of whether the three synoptic gospels were composed to follow the liturgical calendar - in other words, intended to be read aloud section-by-section throughout the church year, with each section illuminating a theme found in the Torah readings for that day. (Church lectionaries follow the same principle.) If so, then any attempt to tease out a chronology would be fundamentally misguided, as episodes from Jesus's life and teachings would have been re-arranged to fit a one-year period. In brief, the primary events in Jesus' life are believed to have occurred around these times:[1] : :: c. 8 BC - Suggested birth (earliest estimate) :: c. 5 BC/4 BC - Herod the Great's death :: c. 6 - Suggested birth (latest), Census of Quirinius :: c. 26/27 - Suggested death (earliest), Pontius Pilate appointed governor of Iudaea Province :: c. 28/29 - John the Baptist begins mission in "15th year of Tiberius" (Luke 3:1-2) :: c. 36/37 - Suggested death (latest), Pilate removed from office[2] ::
see link "Wikipedia: Chronology of Jesus" on left..
The question is much too broad to be answered on the internet (It sounds like an paper question). I would check out Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Generally - In terms of Aristotle's conception of the good, he believed it was done for the sake of itself. For example - Medicine is done for the sake of health, strategy for victory, but the chief good, the highest good, this is done only for the sake of itself. For reference, Nichomachean Ethics, Book I, Chapter 7. Aristotle's ethical philosophy is widespread, much like his work, and combines ethics with politics - the ethical life is one lived with other people, friends, and in practice of virtues. This can only be done in a political community. He believed in virtue ethics, the idea that an excellent person is one who has certain virtues - courage, temperance, etc. These virtues were to be practiced and exercised through practical wisdom (application of virtues in life.) The highest good was, in his mind, the study of philosophy - which is what we all should aim for (though not forgetting the other virtues.) (Nico Ethics - Book 6 Chapter 13)
Levinas and Kant require lots of research and I don't think I can do them justice in comparing and contrasting them here. I am in now way qualified to talk on Kant, but I shall briefly mention that Kant believed in a categorical imperative - an action is just if we can apply it universally.
Levinas (again, this is quite rough)- His idea was that we have a certain worldview (following in the tradition of Heidegger (though staunchly against Heidegger) and 20th century continental philosophy) and this worldview is restricting, it makes everything around us part of us! But the Other, let us say your neighbor, another human being, these people are not part of us. They are something wholly different and separate, if we let them (a point of contention - how one might let the Other invade us...it is unknown, but the Other does invade some people) then we see in the Other the idea of the infinity - this idea leads us, calls us, to action, to ethical action. Levinas, along with Aristotle, believed in political action as ethical action. There are some connections here, but there are LOTS of differences, for a big part, just different frameworks that they are working in.
Hope that helped, sorry for the rambling (Levinas is hard to describe without rambling...). I'm no expert on any of these philosophers, so do your own research (Stanford Encyclopedia, etc.) and good luck!
Why do you think that today's conservation groups would not approve of audubon's method?
Early on, the study of birds meant collecting them, mainly by shooting. Audubon, Wilson and others did their studies the "bird in hand" method.
Is Christianity's Golden Rule the same type of ethical theory as Aristotle's Golden Mean?
No. They have similar names, but share little else in common. Christianity's Golden Rule tells us to "do unto others as we would have them do unto us" (cf. Matthew 7:12), whereas Aristotle's Golden Mean is a doctrine that states that every virtue (= good habit) is situated in between two extremes, one by way of excess, and another by way of defect, both of which are vices (= bad habits); for example, fortitude (= bravery) is situated between the extremes of cowardice (defect) and temerity (excess), and both of these excesses are vices.
What are the 3 kinds of friendship human share according to Aristotle?
These are: * Friendship with good people. * Friendships based on Utility. * Frienships based on Pleasure.Aristotle considered only friendships of good people to be complete, as the other two variants are based on circumstance.
rule by one
What was aristotle's golden rule?
He claimed that the best can be found halfway between the two extremes - lack and excess.
Like many people through the ages, both before and after Aristotle's time, Aristotle believed that deaf people were imperfect and were, to that extent, not fully human. He argued that without hearing, people could not learn and that deaf people were doomed, therefore, to a life without either intelligent thought or power of reason.
In the strictest sense of the word, Plato was not a Stoic: the Stoic 'school' originated with Zeno of Citium, at Athens, ca. 300 B.C., several decades after Plato's death. Zeno and the later Stoics were undoubtedly influenced themes and ideas raised in Plato's writings (as well as Aristotle's), but this is far as the connection goes.
What are the contribution of Aristotle in motion?
Aristotle's ideas were believed to be true from 500 BC to 1600 CE. That's about 1,100 years of false knowledge. What Aristotle taught, appeared to be correct because it seemed obvious, but not all things are obvious.
Aristotle's view on motion seems to make sense. Unfortunately, it isn't correct. But because his theories appeared to make sense, they became popular and well accepted for a very long time. The key ideas that Aristotle tried to teach were:
All motion on the Earth is linear .
All motion in the heavens (outer space) is curved .
The speed at which an object falls is directly related to the mass of an object .
Motion could be considered in two main factions: natural and violent.
Motion continues so long as there is only an applied motion to an object. Removing the motion stops the object.
It would take a man named Galileo to start the wheels of change in this field of knowledge called physics.
Galileo, unlike Aristotle, proved that motion to the Earth does not depend on the weight of an object. All objects fall to the ground at the same speed. So you see, the speed at which an object falls at has nothing to do with the mass of the object. All objects that are released from the same starting point reach the ground in the same time. Galileo proved Aristotle wrong. He proved the concept of what is called force and mass.
When did Aristotle discover mathematical logic?
With the Prior Analytics, Aristotle is credited with the earliest study of formal logic, and his conception of it was the dominant form of Western logic until 19th century advances in mathematical logic.
Comparison between Aristotle and Confucius?
what are you serious? ancient greek to ancient chinese? wow what a deep thought.
Aristotle was an empiricist. So, no he was not a nativist.
Why did Aristotle consider zero and 1 not to be numbers?
Because he considers them as units,not numbers
By his definition,units are indivisible in quantity.
(see Aristotle and maths,Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy)
He worked in ancient Greece mostly in the city of Athens.
What are Aristotle and Linneaus known for in relation to classification?
Aristotle was known as the great classifier, since he organized the world in categories of all sorts. To be more specific, he categorized all things perceivable to man into 10 categories: substance, quantity, qualification, relation, place, time, posture, state, action, and affection. All these are objects or things in the world that can be related to each other by virtue of some of the categories.
Carl Linneaus invented the binomial nomenclature, which is the system of naming all living things using two latin words, e.g. homo sapiens. The first word denotes the species, the second word the subspecies within that species.
So, they both created one system that was to encompass the entire world, whereas Aristotle's categories are slightly more abstract, Linneaus' are very concrete.
