与亚里士多德同义谓词的比较

IF 0.7 1区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Ronja Hildebrandt
{"title":"与亚里士多德同义谓词的比较","authors":"Ronja Hildebrandt","doi":"10.1353/hph.2024.a932352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"abstract: Aristotle claims that cross-sense comparisons—that is, comparisons with respect to homonymous predicates—are impossible. At the same time, he uses such comparisons in arguments that are fundamental to his philosophical project, such as when he claims that happiness is better than instrumental goods. In this paper, I discuss how this tension arises, and I explain why the cross-sense comparisons Aristotle uses are nevertheless possible. Using evidence from the Protrepticus , I claim Aristotle distinguishes two kinds of comparisons: comparisons of degrees of a quality, and comparisons of the priority with which a quality applies. Only the latter admits of some cross-sense comparisons.","PeriodicalId":46448,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparisons with Homonymous Predicates in Aristotle\",\"authors\":\"Ronja Hildebrandt\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/hph.2024.a932352\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"abstract: Aristotle claims that cross-sense comparisons—that is, comparisons with respect to homonymous predicates—are impossible. At the same time, he uses such comparisons in arguments that are fundamental to his philosophical project, such as when he claims that happiness is better than instrumental goods. In this paper, I discuss how this tension arises, and I explain why the cross-sense comparisons Aristotle uses are nevertheless possible. Using evidence from the Protrepticus , I claim Aristotle distinguishes two kinds of comparisons: comparisons of degrees of a quality, and comparisons of the priority with which a quality applies. Only the latter admits of some cross-sense comparisons.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.2024.a932352\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.2024.a932352","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:亚里士多德声称,跨义比较--即同义谓词的比较--是不可能的。与此同时,他又在其哲学项目的基本论证中使用了这种比较,比如他声称幸福优于工具性商品。在本文中,我将讨论这种紧张关系是如何产生的,并解释为什么亚里士多德使用的跨义比较是可能的。利用《原初论》中的证据,我声称亚里士多德区分了两种比较:一种是品质程度的比较,另一种是品质适用优先性的比较。只有后者可以进行一些跨义比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparisons with Homonymous Predicates in Aristotle
abstract: Aristotle claims that cross-sense comparisons—that is, comparisons with respect to homonymous predicates—are impossible. At the same time, he uses such comparisons in arguments that are fundamental to his philosophical project, such as when he claims that happiness is better than instrumental goods. In this paper, I discuss how this tension arises, and I explain why the cross-sense comparisons Aristotle uses are nevertheless possible. Using evidence from the Protrepticus , I claim Aristotle distinguishes two kinds of comparisons: comparisons of degrees of a quality, and comparisons of the priority with which a quality applies. Only the latter admits of some cross-sense comparisons.
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
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: Since January 2002, the Journal of the History of Philosophy has been published by The Johns Hopkins University Press. For subscriptions, change of address, and back issues, please contact Subscription Services. In addition to photocopying allowed by the "fair use" doctrine, JHP authorizes personal or educational multiple-copying by instructors for use within a course. This policy does not cover photocopying for commercial use either by individuals or publishers. All such uses must be authorized by JHP.
×
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