Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  brutishness / beastliness
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The Polish version of the article was published in “Roczniki Humanistyczne,” vol. 64 (2016), issue 3. The article deals with “brutishness” or “beastliness” (thēriotēs), a concept introduced by Aristotle in the seventh book of the Nicomachean Ethics and defined by him as a negative ethical disposition, different both from vice (kakia) and from incontinence (akrasia), and leading to such pathological behaviours as cannibalism, paedophilia, omophagy, phobias and compulsions. Aristotle’s statements concerning brutishness (VII 1, 1145a15–35, VII 5, 1148b15–1149a24 and VII 6, 1149b23–1150a8) are examined and interpreted in order to clarify the following issues: the essence of thēriotēs as a specific ethical disposition (Sections I–II), its concrete forms and their causes (Section III), the moral-psychological condition of persons with a brutish hexis (Section IV), and their self-consciousness and moral responsibility for their brutish acts (Section V).
PL
Artykuł poświęcony jest pojęciu bestialstwa (thēriotēs), wprowadzonemu przez Arystotelesa w VII księdze Etyki nikomachejskiej i zdefiniowanemu przez niego jako negatywna, różna zarówno od nikczemności (kakia) jak i od nieopanowania (akrasia) dyspozycja etyczna, prowadząca do patologicznych zachowań takich jak kanibalizm, pedofilia, omofagia, fobie i kompulsje. W tekście zostaje podjęta próba interpretacji wypowiedzi Arystotelesa dotyczących bestialstwa (EN VII 1, 1145a15-35; VII 5, 1148b15-1149a24; VII 6, 1149b23-1150a8) w celu rozjaśnienia szeregu istotnych dla rozumienia tej koncepcji kwestii, takich jak: istota bestialstwa jako specyficznej dyspozycji etycznej (cz. I-II), jej konkretne postaci oraz ich geneza (cz. III), psychologiczno-moralna kondycja osób dotkniętych bestialską dyspozycją (cz. IV) oraz problem świadomości i odpowiedzialności moralnej tychże osób (cz. V).
EN
The article deals with the „brutishness” or „beastliness” (thēriotēs), a concept introduced by Aristotle in the seventh book of the Nicomachean Ethics and defined by him as a negative ethical disposition, different both from vice (kakia) and from incontinence (akrasia), and leading to such pathological behaviours as canibalism, paedophilia, omophagia, phobias and compulsions. Aristotle’s statements concerning the brutishness (VII 1, 1145a15-35, VII 5, 1148b15-1149a24 and VII 6, 1149b23-1150a8) are examined and interpreted in order to clarify the following issues: the essence of the thēriotēs as a specific ethical disposition (Part I-II), its concrete forms and their causes (Part III), the moral-psychological condition of persons with a brutish hexis (Part IV), and their self-consciousness and moral responsibility for their bestial acts (Part V).
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.