Aristotle’s Criticism of the Platonic Forms as Causes in De Generatione et Corruptione II 9. A Reading Based on Philoponus’ Exegesis

• Authors: Melina G. Mouzala
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

In the De Generatione et Corruptione II 9, Aristotle aims to achieve the confirmation of his theory of the necessity of the efficient cause. In this chapter he sets out his criticism on the one hand of those who wrongly attributed the efficient cause to other kinds of causality and on the other, of those who ignored the efficient cause. More specifically Aristotle divides all preceding theories which attempted to explain generation and corruption into two groups: i) those which offered an explanation by using the formal cause ii) those which provided an explanation by using the material or the instrumental causes. According to Philopo­nus, when Aristotle reproaches the other philosophers for adducing no proper notion of the efficient cause he alludes to both Anaxagoras and Plato. Regarding Anaxagoras, in our view this cannot be confirmed by internal textual evidence. In terms of Plato, in this chapter we trace an explicit and an implicit criticism of the Platonic Forms as causes. Aris­totle’s implicit criticism is that the Forms are not at all active causes. We can understand better the grounds for this criticism if we also consider his relevant arguments in Book Lambda of his Metaphysics. His explicit criticism, articulated in two arguments, is formulated in GC 335b18–24. We examine the different lines of its interpretation in the second­ary literature, but primarily we focus on Philoponus’ exegesis, which contributes significantly, not only to the clarification of Aristotle’s thinking, but also to the manifestation of the arguments articulated in defence of the Platonic theory of the Forms. In this paper, through the analysis of Philoponus’ exegesis we set out to prove that Aristotle’s criticism of the Platonic causes can be construed from the perspective of either Aristo­telian theory or the Platonic and Neoplatonic influence. Finally, based on Philoponus’ exegesis, we examine Aristotle’s criticism of those who posited matter or instrumental causes as efficient causes.

Keywords

EN

Aristotle; Plato; De Generatione et Corruptione; Phaedo; criticism; Forms; causes; efficient cause

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Peitho. Examina Antiqua
• Year: 2016
• Volume: 7
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 123-148

Dates

published

2016-03-17

Contributors

author

Melina G. Mouzala

References

• Alexander of Aphrodisias, In Aristotelis Metaphysica commentaria, ed. M. Hayduck, Berolini 1891.
• Aristotle, Metaphysics, translated by W.D. Ross, Oxford 1908.
• Aristotle, Physics, vol. I: Books 1–4, translated by P.H. Wicksteed, F.M. Cornford, Cambridge 1957.
• Asclepius, In Aristotelis Metaphysicorum libros A–Z commentaria. ed. M. Hayduck, Berolini 1888.
• Diels, H., Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Band I, Berlin 19062.
• Joannes Philoponus, In Aristotelis Physicorum Libros Tres Priores Commentaria, ed. H. Vitelli, Berolini 1887.
• Joannes Philoponus, In Aristotelis libros De Generatione et Corruptione commentaria, ed. H. Vitelli, Berolini 1897.
• Philoponus, On Aristotle On Coming-to-Be and Perishing 2.5–11, translated by I. Kupreeva, Duckworth 2005.
• Plato, Volume I: Euthyphro. Apology. Crito. Phaedo, Phaedrus, translated by H.N. Fowler, Cambridge, MA 1971 (1914).
• Simplicius, In Aristotelis Physicorum libros quattuor priores commentaria, ed. H. Diels, Berolini 1882.
• Simplicius, On Aristotle’s Physics 2, translated by B. Fleet, Duckworth 1997.
• Westerink, L.G., The Greek Commentaries on Plato’s Phaedo, II Damascius. The Prometheus Trust 2009 (1976).
• Annas, J., 1982, “Aristotle on Inefficient causes”, The Philosophical Quarterly, 32, 311–326.
• Barnes, J., 19942, Aristotle. Posterior Analytics, Translated with a Commentary. Oxford.
• Berti, E., 2000, “Unmoved mover(s) as efficient cause(s) in Metaphysics Λ 6,” in: M. Frede, D. Charles (eds.), Aristotle’s Metaphysics Lambda. Symposium Aristotelicum, Oxford, pp. 181–206.
• Bostock, D., 1994, Aristotle, Metaphysics, Books Z and H, translated with a commentary, Oxford.
• Charlton, W., 1970, Aristotle’s Physics, Books I and II, translated with introduction and notes, Oxford.
• Cherniss, H., 1944, Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato and the Academy, Baltimore.
• Fine, G., 2003 (repr. 2008), “Forms as causes: Plato and Aristotle,” in: G. Fine (ed.), Plato on Knowledge and Forms. Selected Essays, Oxford, pp. 350–396.
• Hackforth, R., 1972, Plato’s Phaedo, translated with an Introduction and Commentary.
• Irwin, T., 1988, Aristotle’s First Principles, Oxford.
• Joachim, H.H., 1922, Aristotle, On Coming-to-be and Passing-away (De Generatione et Corruptione), A Revised Text with Introduction and Commentary, Oxford.
• Lennox, J.G., 1985, “Plato’s Unnatural Teleology,” in: D.J. O’Meara (ed.), Platonic Investigations, Washington, D.C., pp. 195–218.
• Mouzala, M.G., 2003, To problēma tēs kinēseōs kai tēs metabolēs eis tēn Physikēn akroasin tou Aristotelous (The problem of motion and change in Aristotle’s Physics). Doctoral Dissertation. National and Capodistrian University of Athens, School of Philosophy, Dep. of Philosophy, Education and Psychology, Section of Philosophy.
• Mouzala, M.G., 2008, Ousia kai Orismos, Hē Problēmatikē tēs henotētos eis ta oikeia kephalaia tōn “Meta ta Physika” tou Aristotelous (Substance and Definition: The Problematic of Unity in the relevant chapters of Aristotle’s Metaphysics). Athens.
• Mouzala, M.G., 2012, “Aristotle’s Method of Understanding the First Principles of Natural Things”, Peitho. Examina Antiqua 1 [3], pp. 31–50.
• Ross, W.D., 1924, Aristotle’s Metaphysics, A revised text with Introduction and Commentary, vols. I–II, Oxford.
• Ross, W.D., 1951, Plato’s Theory of Ideas, Oxford.
• Sedley, D., 1998, “Platonic Causes”, Phronesis, 43 [1], pp. 114–132.
• Sorabji, R., 1988, Matter, Space and Motion: Theories in Antiquity and their Sequel. London.
• Stocks, J.L., Wallis, H.B., 1922, Aristotle. De caelo, Oxford.
• Taylor, C.C.W., 1969, “Forms as Causes in the Phaedo”, Mind 78 [309], pp. 45–59.
• Verrycken, K., 1990, “The metaphysics of Ammonius son of Hermeias,” in: R.R.K. Sorabji (ed.), Aristotle Transformed, London–Ithaca NY, pp. 199–231.
• Vlastos, G., 1973, Platonic Studies, Princeton, N.J.
• Watson, J.M., 1909, Aristotle’s Criticisms of Plato, London–New York–Toronto–Melbourne.
• Williams, C.J.F., 1982 (repr. 2002), Aristotle’s De Generatione et Corruptione, translated with notes, Oxford.

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/pea.2016.1.6