Alexander of Aphrodisias and the Active Intellect as Final Cause

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Elenchos Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1515/elen-2023-0004
Gweltaz Guyomarc’h
{"title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias and the Active Intellect as Final Cause","authors":"Gweltaz Guyomarc’h","doi":"10.1515/elen-2023-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In his own De anima, Alexander of Aphrodisias famously identifies the “active” (poietikon) intellect with the prime mover in Metaphysics Λ. However, Alexander’s claim raises an issue: why would this divine intellect come in the middle of a study of soul in general and of human intellection in particular? As Paul Moraux asks in his pioneering work on Alexander’s conception of the intellect, is the active intellect a “useless addition”? In this paper, I try to answer this question by challenging a solution according to which the active intellect would intervene directly with the material intellect to trigger its ordinary working. I argue that the active intellect acts as a final cause, both for human intellect and for its ordinary objects of thought. The active intellect is twice “cause of the intellection”, i.e. cause of the actualization of human thought: once (i) when it offers thought occasions for thinking through objects, and again (ii) when it actualizes mediately the human intellect itself in its development. This reading agrees with Alexander’s usual position about the prime mover’s causality. It accounts for the multiplicity of expressions with which Alexander describes the causality of the active intellect in his De anima. It also explains why the development of human intellect has been described without direct reference to active intellect, since substances do not aim directly at the First cause, but their aiming at it is mediated by their desire for their own good.","PeriodicalId":38726,"journal":{"name":"Elenchos","volume":"44 1","pages":"93 - 117"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Elenchos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/elen-2023-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In his own De anima, Alexander of Aphrodisias famously identifies the “active” (poietikon) intellect with the prime mover in Metaphysics Λ. However, Alexander’s claim raises an issue: why would this divine intellect come in the middle of a study of soul in general and of human intellection in particular? As Paul Moraux asks in his pioneering work on Alexander’s conception of the intellect, is the active intellect a “useless addition”? In this paper, I try to answer this question by challenging a solution according to which the active intellect would intervene directly with the material intellect to trigger its ordinary working. I argue that the active intellect acts as a final cause, both for human intellect and for its ordinary objects of thought. The active intellect is twice “cause of the intellection”, i.e. cause of the actualization of human thought: once (i) when it offers thought occasions for thinking through objects, and again (ii) when it actualizes mediately the human intellect itself in its development. This reading agrees with Alexander’s usual position about the prime mover’s causality. It accounts for the multiplicity of expressions with which Alexander describes the causality of the active intellect in his De anima. It also explains why the development of human intellect has been described without direct reference to active intellect, since substances do not aim directly at the First cause, but their aiming at it is mediated by their desire for their own good.
阿佛洛的亚历山大与作为最终原因的活跃知识分子
在他自己的《论阿凡达》中,阿佛洛狄西亚斯的亚历山大将“活跃的”(poietikon)智力与《形而上学》中的原动力(Λ)进行了著名的区分。然而,亚历山大的主张提出了一个问题:为什么这种神圣的智慧会出现在对灵魂的一般研究中,尤其是对人类智慧的研究中?正如保罗·莫罗(Paul Moraux)在他关于亚历山大智力概念的开创性著作中所问的那样,活跃的智力是“无用的补充”吗?在本文中,我试图通过挑战一种解决方案来回答这个问题,根据这种解决方案,活动智力将直接干预物质智力以触发其正常工作。我认为,无论是对人类的智力还是对其通常的思维对象来说,活跃的智力都是最终原因。主动的理智是双重的"理智的原因",即人的思维的实现的原因:一次是(i)当它为通过对象进行思维提供了思维的场合时,另一次是(ii)当它直接实现人的理智本身的发展时。这种解读与亚历山大通常关于原动机的因果关系的立场一致。它解释了亚历山大在他的《论动物》中描述活跃智力的因果关系时所使用的多种表达方式。这也解释了为什么人类智力的发展在描述时没有直接涉及到活跃的智力,因为物质并不直接以第一因为目标,而是以它们对自身利益的渴望为中介。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Elenchos
Elenchos Arts and Humanities-Classics
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书