Uma “exploração arqueológica” da ideia de vazio como recipiente a partir de Aristóteles, Physica 4.6 213a15-19

Even though rejecting the notion of void, Aristotle considers it a crucial theme in his discussion about motion. That becomes evident when we find four chapters of Physics 4 dedicated to the discussion and refutation of the void. In this paper, I set on an exploratory search for the reasons that moved Aristotle to discuss the idea of void as a container (ἀγγεῖον) in Phys. 4.6 213a15-19, unearthing a series of terms and notions used by previous thinkers that may have led Aristotle to formulate such conception. Special attention is given to Democritus, who, with his theory of atoms and void, is clearly the main target of Aristotle’s criticism of the void. I conclude that the notion of void as a container is not at all strange to ancient thinkers, and that its reconstitution by Aristotle is everything but trivial and simplistic, inasmuch as the Democritean notion of void he intends to refute is everything but trivial and simplistic.

The Use of Aristotle’s Biology in Nemesius’ On Human Nature

Towards the end of the fourth century CE Nemesius, bishop of Emesa in Syria, composed his treatise On Human Nature (Περὶ φύσεως ἀνθρώπου). The nature of the soul and its relation to the body are central to Nemesius’ treatment. In developing his argument, he draws not only on Christian authors but on a variety of pagan philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics and the great physician-cum-philosopher Galen of Pergamum. This paper examines Nemesius’ references to Aristotle’s biology in particular, focusing on a few passages in the light of Aristotle’s Generation of Animals and History of Animals as well as the doxographic tradition. The themes in question are: the status of the intellect, the scale of nature and the respective roles of the male and female in reproduction. Central questions are: Exactly which impact did Aristotle make on his thinking? Was it mediated or direct? Why does Nemesius cite Aristotle and how? Long used as a source for earlier works now lost, Nemesius’ work may provide intriguing glimpses of the intellectual culture of his time. This paper is designed to contribute to this new approach to his work.

Du pastorat divin au gouvernement humain Sur la genèse et les limites de la politique dans le Politique de Platon

The Statesman can be considered one of the most difficult platonic texts to read. However, if one analyzes the work carefully, it becomes easy to realize that it gives us, through the development of a dialectical research centered on the definition of the political man (πολιτικὸς ἀνήρ), a precious philosophical teaching on the nature of the politics and its inherently human character, teaching that should be taken into account not only for the understanding of the meaning of this particular dialogue but also for the understanding of platonic political theory as a whole. In this article, we will try to understand this aspect of the Statesman by analyzing two parts of the text that are of fundamental importance to its economy: that relating to the myth of Kronos (268d-277c) and that devoted to the theory of the best regime (292d- 303 d).

The Place of Human Beings in the Natural Environment - Aristotle’s Philosophy of Biology and the Dominant Anthropocentric Reading of Genesis

In a seminal essay from 1967, historian Lynn White, Jr., argues that the profound cause of today’s environmental crisis is the anthropocentric perspective, embedded in the Christian “roots” of Western tradition, which assigns an intrinsic value to human beings solely. Though White’s thesis relies on a specific tradition – the so-called “dominant anthropocentric reading” of Genesis – the idea that anthropocentrism provides the ideological basis for the exploitation of nature has proven tenacious, and even today is the ground assumption of the historical and philosophical debate on environmental issues. This paper investigates the possible impact on this debate of a different kind of anthropocentrism: Aristotle’s philosophy of biology. The topic is controversial, since it involves opposing traditions of interpretations; for the purpose of the present paper, the dominant anthropocentric reading of Gen. 1.28 will be analyzed, and the relevant passages from Aristotle’s De Partibus Animalium, showing his commitment to a more sophisticated anthropocentric perspective, will be reviewed.

Education, Conflict and Harmony in Book 1 of Plato’s Laws

Book 1 of Plato’s Laws, and particularly the image of the puppet introduced near its end, has been traditionally interpreted as presenting the moral psychology model that underlies the educational system delineated by the Athenian Stranger, which construes virtue as consonance between the non–rational and the rational elements of the soul. But a different and competing conception of virtue looms large in Laws 1, virtue as victory of the best part of the soul in psychic conflict. This paper argues that the Athenian’s conception of education as the correct conformation of originally conflicting psychic forces requires the simultaneous presence of the harmony and the conflict models of virtue in Laws 1. Education is in turn defined by calculation, the rational activity which persuasively leads the conflicting non–rational forces towards a consonant reciprocal rapport. By strategically developing his understanding of education and calculation in Laws 1, the Athenian shows how the harmony model of virtue overcomes the conflict model, while at the same time recognising that there is some truth to the conflict model after all and integrating it within the harmony model.

Proofs by Reductio ad Impossibile in Aristotle’s Prior Analytics

This paper aims at clarifying the procedure of proofs by reductio ad impossibile in Aristotle’s Prior Analytics, especially elucidating what can be taken as impossibility in such proofs. Traditional interpretation has it that the impossibility in Aristotle’s reductio proofs must be a contradiction. I argue for an alternative interpretation according to which both contrarieties and contradictions are suitable as the impossibility required by the proofs in question. I also present a definition of proof by reductio ad impossibile in accordance with the alternative interpretation.

“Nous alone enters from outside” - Aristotelian embryology and early Christian philosophy

In a work entitled On the Generation of Animals, Aristotle remarks that “intellect (nous) alone enters from outside (thurathen)”. Interpretations of this passage as dualistic dominate the history of ideas and allow for a joining together of Platonic and Aristotelian doctrine on the soul. This, however, pulls against the well-known Aristotelian position that soul and body are intertwined and interdependent. The most influential interpretations thereby misrepresent Aristotle’s view on soul and lack any real engagement with his embryology. This paper seeks to extract the account of intellect (nous) in Aristotelian embryology from this interpretative background and place it within the context of his mature biological thought. A clear account of the actual import of this statement in its relevant context is given before explaining how it has been misunderstood by various interpretative traditions. The paper finishes by touching on how early commentary by Christian writers, freed as it was from the imperative to synthesise Greek philosophy, differed from those that came after. While realising that Aristotle’s position would not aid them in their explanations of the soul’s survival after death, their engagement with Aristotle’s science allowed for other aspects of theology concerning the fittingness of soul to body.

Mysterious Bodies: Aristotelian Animal Generation and the Early Christian Doctrine of Bodily Resurrection

In the fifteenth chapter of his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul makes a number of philosophically mysterious claims about the relationship between the ‘earthly’ body and the resurrected or ‘spiritual’ body. To what extent do these claims reflect themes present in Aristotle’s own views on the relationship between matter and organism? We will argue that Aristotle’s understanding of the relationship between matter and organism already reflects a commitment to the two central claims that Paul takes to be definitive of the relationship between earthly and spiritual body. On the one hand, Paul insists that the earthly body is not itself the resurrected or spiritual body, but only a seed that is sown for the latter. Further separating the earthly from the spiritual body, he compares their distinction to the distinction between the bodies of different animals. On the other hand, the chapter ends with language of continuity between the earthly and the spiritual body. Precisely this seeming conflict is present in Aristotle’s analysis of animal generation. Whereas many interpretations of Aristotle’s analysis privilege one side of the conflict over the other, I will argue that both must be equally privileged, yielding a parallel between the cases of animal generation in Aristotle and bodily resurrection in early Christianity.

Natural Sciences and Anthropology in Didymus the Blind’s Commentaries on the Bible: a Possible Aristotelian Influence

This paper gathers from Didymus’ exegetical works (in particular from the lessons on the book of Psalms and on the Ecclesiastes) all significant testimonies concerning his knowledge of natural sciences and his anthropological doctrine. Based on these materials I will briefly discuss their possible sources, trying to answer following questions: a) What kind of Aristotelian doctrines can we recognise in Didymus’ statements concerning cosmology, biology and anthropology? b) Is there sufficient evidence to conclude that he had, beside the Organon, also a direct knowledge of other Aristotelian works? c) How important are methods and doctrines coming from Aristotle for Didymus’ exegetical practice?