Search results

1

Aristotle’s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories

100%

Militello C.

Peitho. Examina Antiqua

|

2014

|

vol. 5

|

issue 1

91-118

EN

This paper lists and examines the explicit references to Aristotle’s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic commentaries on the Categories. The references to the Topics by Porphyry, Dexippus, Ammonius, Simplicius, Olympiodorus, Philoponus and David (Elias) are listed according the usual prolegomena to Aristotle’s works. In particular, the paper reconstructs David (Elias)’s original thesis about the proponents of the title Pre-Topics for the Categories and compares Ammonius’, Simplicius’ and Olympiodorus’ doxographies about the postpraedicamenta. Moreover, the study identifies two general trends. The first one is that all the commentators after Proclus share the same general view about: the authenticity of the Topics, Aristotle’s writing style in them, the part of philosophy to which they belong, their purpose, their usefulness and their place in the reading order. The second one is that whereas Porphyry, Dexippus and Simplicius use the Topics as an aid to understanding the Categories, Ammonius, Olympiodorus and David (Elias) do not.

2

Multivocity in Topics 1.15

99%

Domaradzki M.

Peitho. Examina Antiqua

|

2016

|

vol. 7

|

issue 1

69-86

EN

This paper discusses Aristotle’s account of multivocity (πολλαχῶς/ πλεοναχῶς λέγεται) as expounded in Topics 1.15. This article argues that an inquiry into how many ways (ποσαχῶς) something is said becomes for Aristotle a tool of dialectical examination that he employs throughout his entire philosophical career: investigating the many/multiple ways (πολλαχῶς/πλεοναχῶς) something is said allows one to recognize the ambiguity of the term in question and, consequently, to construct an adequate definition of its referent. The present study reconstructs the various strategies for detecting ambiguity and discusses its different types. Subsequently, the paper accounts for why Aristotle moves so easily from words and their meanings to things and their essences. Finally, the article presents an analysis of the connection between the many ways something is said and the various categories it is predicated in. The considerations are supported by a new translation of Topics 1.15.

PL

This paper discusses Aristotle’s account of multivocity (πολλαχῶς/ πλεοναχῶς λέγεται) as expounded in Topics 1.15. This article argues that an inquiry into how many ways (ποσαχῶς) something is said becomes for Aristotle a tool of dialectical examination that he employs throughout his entire philosophical career: investigating the many/multiple ways (πολλαχῶς/πλεοναχῶς) something is said allows one to recognize the ambiguity of the term in question and, consequently, to construct an adequate definition of its referent. The present study reconstructs the various strategies for detecting ambiguity and discusses its different types. Subsequently, the paper accounts for why Aristotle moves so easily from words and their meanings to things and their essences. Finally, the article presents an analysis of the connection between the many ways something is said and the various categories it is predicated in. The considerations are supported by a new translation of Topics 1.15.

3

Aristotelův pojem zdravého rozumu

86%

Glombíček P.

Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)

|

2013

|

vol. 61

|

issue 3

371-387

EN

The text interprets the particular concepts in Aristotle’s work which present themselves as candidates for being the counterpart to the modern concept of common sense, and it introduces them in their mutual relatedness. Aristotle works with the term endoxos, particularly in his logical and rhetorical texts, which he uses for statements and persons which are recognised in a given community. In epistemology he works with the term koiné aisthésis in connection with perception as such. The author points to a third concept, which Aristotle, thanks to his work in physiology, has a general ability to perceive, and which belongs to ethics: this is fronésis In an interpretation of fronésis there is also a place for the last directly relevant concept – orthos logos. Aristotle’s conception of conduct, which he sometimes interprets with the help of a so-called practical syllogism, displays the role of recognised statements as the typical general premisses in these syllogisms, and the role of persons recognised for their fronésis as the measure of the determining criteria for what is good conduct.

CS

Text vykládá jednotlivé pojmy, které v Aristotelově díle představují kandidáty na protějšek moderního pojmu zdravého rozumu, a uvádí je do vzájemné souvislosti. Především v logických a rétorických textech Aristotelés pracuje s termínem endoxos, který používá pro výroky a osoby, které jsou v daném společenství uznávány. V epistemologii pracuje s termínem koiné aisthésis v souvislosti s vnímáním jako takovým. Autor poukazuje na vazbu, kterou u Aristotela díky jeho práci ve fyziologii má obecná schopnost vnímat třetí klíčový pojem, který patří do etiky, totiž na fronésis. V rámci výkladu fronésis má místo také poslední bezprostředně relevantní pojem – orthos logos. Aristotelova koncepce jednání, jež Aristotelés vykládá někdy pomocí tzv. praktického sylogismu, pak ukazuje na roli uznávaných výroků jako typických obecných premis v těchto sylogismech a roli osob uznávaných pro svou fronésis jako měřítek určujících kritéria pro to, co je dobré jednání.

4

Singerova britva, druhizmus a výnimočné postavenie človeka vo vesmíre = : Singer’s razor, speciesism and the exceptional status of man in the universe

30%

Sýkora P.

Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)

|

2013

|

vol. 61

|

issue 3

415-426

XX

The aim of this study is to refute the frequent and repeated critical objections to Singer’s almost four-decades-old argument against speciesism. These objections are based, above all, on misunderstanding. There is misunderstanding not only of the argument itself, but also of Singer’s methodological starting point, which we have termed “Singer’s ethical razor”. In the text we show why it is not possible to reject Singer’s utilitarian argument only by rejecting utilitarianism en bloc. In the same way, we show why it is not appropriate to charge Singer with failing to extend his ethics to include plants and lifeless nature. In fact the opposite is true because Singer clearly demonstrates how environmental ethics relating to the protection of the wild can be based on the same principle of the equal consideration of interests which is the basis for the moral unacceptability of speciesism.

Refine search results

2 Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)

2 Peitho. Examina Antiqua

1 Domaradzki M.

1 Glombíček P.

1 Militello C.

1 Sýkora P.

1 2016

1 2014

2 2013

Aristotle’s Topics in the Greek Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories

Multivocity in Topics 1.15

Aristotelův pojem zdravého rozumu

Singerova britva, druhizmus a výnimočné postavenie človeka vo vesmíre = : Singer’s razor, speciesism and the exceptional status of man in the universe