亚里士多德和 Theophrastus 的人类本体论

Apeiron Pub Date : 2024-06-18 DOI:10.1515/apeiron-2022-0116
Robert Roreitner
{"title":"亚里士多德和 Theophrastus 的人类本体论","authors":"Robert Roreitner","doi":"10.1515/apeiron-2022-0116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper presents a detailed reconstruction of Theophrastus’ account of human ontogeny, which is built around Aristotle’s notoriously difficult claim in Generation of Animals II 3 that “νοῦς alone enters from without”. I argue that this account (which is known to us via quotes from Theophrastus’ de Anima II and On Motion I) provides a viable alternative to the traditional trilemma between naturalist traducianism, creationism, and pre-existence, as well as offering an attractive but so far unappreciated interpretation of Aristotle’s account of human ontogeny. More specifically, I argue that the extant evidence poses a challenge to the two dominant interpretations of “νοῦς from without” in the last decades: a dialectical one, according to which Aristotle ultimately rejects this claim, and a naturalizing one (often inspired by Alexander of Aphrodisias) that obliterates the essential difference between νοῦς and the other parts of the soul.","PeriodicalId":517049,"journal":{"name":"Apeiron","volume":"42 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human Ontogeny in Aristotle and Theophrastus\",\"authors\":\"Robert Roreitner\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/apeiron-2022-0116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This paper presents a detailed reconstruction of Theophrastus’ account of human ontogeny, which is built around Aristotle’s notoriously difficult claim in Generation of Animals II 3 that “νοῦς alone enters from without”. I argue that this account (which is known to us via quotes from Theophrastus’ de Anima II and On Motion I) provides a viable alternative to the traditional trilemma between naturalist traducianism, creationism, and pre-existence, as well as offering an attractive but so far unappreciated interpretation of Aristotle’s account of human ontogeny. More specifically, I argue that the extant evidence poses a challenge to the two dominant interpretations of “νοῦς from without” in the last decades: a dialectical one, according to which Aristotle ultimately rejects this claim, and a naturalizing one (often inspired by Alexander of Aphrodisias) that obliterates the essential difference between νοῦς and the other parts of the soul.\",\"PeriodicalId\":517049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Apeiron\",\"volume\":\"42 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Apeiron\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/apeiron-2022-0116\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Apeiron","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/apeiron-2022-0116","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

摘要 本文围绕亚里士多德在《动物的产生》II 3 中提出的 "只有νοῦς从外部进入 "这一众所周知的难题,详细重构了 Theophrastus 关于人类本体的论述。我认为,这一论述(我们通过引用西奥弗拉斯图斯的《论动物》(de Anima II) 和《论运动》(On Motion I) 得知这一论述)为传统的自然神论、创世论和先存在论之间的三难选择提供了一个可行的替代方案,同时也为亚里士多德关于人类本体的论述提供了一个极具吸引力但至今未被重视的解释。更具体地说,我认为现存的证据对过去几十年来对 "νοῦς从无到有 "的两种主流解释提出了挑战:一种是辩证的解释,亚里士多德最终拒绝了这一主张;另一种是归化的解释(通常受阿佛洛狄西亚的亚历山大的启发),抹杀了νοῦς与灵魂其他部分之间的本质区别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Human Ontogeny in Aristotle and Theophrastus
Abstract This paper presents a detailed reconstruction of Theophrastus’ account of human ontogeny, which is built around Aristotle’s notoriously difficult claim in Generation of Animals II 3 that “νοῦς alone enters from without”. I argue that this account (which is known to us via quotes from Theophrastus’ de Anima II and On Motion I) provides a viable alternative to the traditional trilemma between naturalist traducianism, creationism, and pre-existence, as well as offering an attractive but so far unappreciated interpretation of Aristotle’s account of human ontogeny. More specifically, I argue that the extant evidence poses a challenge to the two dominant interpretations of “νοῦς from without” in the last decades: a dialectical one, according to which Aristotle ultimately rejects this claim, and a naturalizing one (often inspired by Alexander of Aphrodisias) that obliterates the essential difference between νοῦς and the other parts of the soul.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信