{"title":"Etymology and Meaning of προαίρεσις in Aristotle's Ethics","authors":"M. Smolak","doi":"10.5507/aither.2018.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In NE III.2 1112a13 Aristotle raises the following question: “What is προαίρεσις?”. But προαίρεσις has different meanings and it is practically untranslatable into modern languages, as are most crucial terms of classical Greek. In this article, the author attempts to explain what προαίρεσις is for Aristotle. The author first presents the etymology of the term προαίρεσις based upon Aristotle’s remarks in his ethical treatises and shows that the term does not reflect what προαίρεσις is for him. Second, the author outlines characteristics of the uncontrolled person and indicates, on this ground, what Aristotle’s προαίρεσις is not. Finally, the author points out that προαίρεσις in the full sense involves two elements – the orectical-deliberative element and the decisional-functional element – and sketches out their features.","PeriodicalId":36348,"journal":{"name":"Aither","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aither","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5507/aither.2018.009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In NE III.2 1112a13 Aristotle raises the following question: “What is προαίρεσις?”. But προαίρεσις has different meanings and it is practically untranslatable into modern languages, as are most crucial terms of classical Greek. In this article, the author attempts to explain what προαίρεσις is for Aristotle. The author first presents the etymology of the term προαίρεσις based upon Aristotle’s remarks in his ethical treatises and shows that the term does not reflect what προαίρεσις is for him. Second, the author outlines characteristics of the uncontrolled person and indicates, on this ground, what Aristotle’s προαίρεσις is not. Finally, the author points out that προαίρεσις in the full sense involves two elements – the orectical-deliberative element and the decisional-functional element – and sketches out their features.