C. Moore
{"title":"Aristotle’s Historiography of Philosophia","authors":"C. Moore","doi":"10.2307/j.ctvj7wps7.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter proceeds from the belief that Heraclides' Pythagoras story implies a historical account of the development of the discipline of philosophia. It describes the rise of this historiography of philosophy, one that materializes only in the Academy. Aristotle's writings provide the clearest evidence. When in the intellectual-historical mode, Aristotle circumscribes philosophia as an engagement with the ideas of others, living or dead, whom one takes also to be or have been engaged in philosophia. This includes Thales's views, for example, since Aristotle can reconstruct them as addressing certain questions and open to critique by successors, including himself in particular, but not those of Hesiod, Orpheus, or other admittedly wise authors, who are not as amenable to this kind of virtual conversation. Aristotle does not explain his departure from Plato's interpersonal picture of philosophia to a disciplinary one, but the density of conversations, memories, texts, and positions found in the Academy probably prompted his new view. Since progress in philosophy matters, and is possible, one should bring to bear everything of relevance to any possible question, not just the ideas of one's immediate interlocutors.","PeriodicalId":247914,"journal":{"name":"Calling Philosophers Names","volume":"107 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Calling Philosophers Names","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvj7wps7.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这一章的出发点是相信赫拉克利德的毕达哥拉斯故事暗示了哲学学科发展的历史叙述。它描述了这种哲学史学的兴起,这种史学只出现在学院里。亚里士多德的著作提供了最清晰的证据。在理智的历史模式中,亚里士多德将哲学定义为与他人的思想的接触,无论这些人是活着的还是死去的,人们都认为他们是或曾经是哲学的。这包括泰勒斯的观点,例如,因为亚里士多德可以将其重构为解决某些问题,并开放给继承者批评,包括他自己,但不包括赫西奥德,俄耳甫斯,或其他公认的明智的作者,他们不接受这种虚拟的对话。亚里士多德并没有解释他从柏拉图的人际哲学图景转向学科哲学图景的原因,但在学院中发现的密集的对话、记忆、文本和立场可能促使了他的新观点。既然哲学上的进步是重要的,而且是可能的,那么一个人就应该接受与任何可能的问题相关的一切,而不仅仅是直接对话者的想法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Aristotle’s Historiography of Philosophia
This chapter proceeds from the belief that Heraclides' Pythagoras story implies a historical account of the development of the discipline of philosophia. It describes the rise of this historiography of philosophy, one that materializes only in the Academy. Aristotle's writings provide the clearest evidence. When in the intellectual-historical mode, Aristotle circumscribes philosophia as an engagement with the ideas of others, living or dead, whom one takes also to be or have been engaged in philosophia. This includes Thales's views, for example, since Aristotle can reconstruct them as addressing certain questions and open to critique by successors, including himself in particular, but not those of Hesiod, Orpheus, or other admittedly wise authors, who are not as amenable to this kind of virtual conversation. Aristotle does not explain his departure from Plato's interpersonal picture of philosophia to a disciplinary one, but the density of conversations, memories, texts, and positions found in the Academy probably prompted his new view. Since progress in philosophy matters, and is possible, one should bring to bear everything of relevance to any possible question, not just the ideas of one's immediate interlocutors.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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