去除物质:亚里士多德对年轻苏格拉底的批判

IF 0.5 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
A. Argenti
{"title":"去除物质:亚里士多德对年轻苏格拉底的批判","authors":"A. Argenti","doi":"10.1515/agph-2018-0053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study is concerned with a crucial passage in Metaphysics Z.11. After having established that only the formal parts of an object are stated in its definition and thus constitute its essence, Aristotle warns us against the process of separating the formal from the material parts. In doing so, he rejects the comparison proposed by Socrates the Younger. Mathematicals (e. g., shapes) cannot be equated to natural objects (e. g., animals) because some material parts must be included in accounting for the latter but not in accounting for the former. The goal of this article is to understand to what extent matter is essential to an object by examining the content of Aristotle’s criticism. My reconstruction shows that Aristotle is still committed to a formalist view. Socrates’ comparison is rejected because it removes matter not from the definitions of the subjects of metaphysics (substances), but from the definitions of their attributes.","PeriodicalId":44741,"journal":{"name":"ARCHIV FUR GESCHICHTE DER PHILOSOPHIE","volume":"104 1","pages":"26 - 52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/agph-2018-0053","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Removing Matter: Aristotle’s Criticism of Socrates the Younger\",\"authors\":\"A. Argenti\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/agph-2018-0053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This study is concerned with a crucial passage in Metaphysics Z.11. After having established that only the formal parts of an object are stated in its definition and thus constitute its essence, Aristotle warns us against the process of separating the formal from the material parts. In doing so, he rejects the comparison proposed by Socrates the Younger. Mathematicals (e. g., shapes) cannot be equated to natural objects (e. g., animals) because some material parts must be included in accounting for the latter but not in accounting for the former. The goal of this article is to understand to what extent matter is essential to an object by examining the content of Aristotle’s criticism. My reconstruction shows that Aristotle is still committed to a formalist view. Socrates’ comparison is rejected because it removes matter not from the definitions of the subjects of metaphysics (substances), but from the definitions of their attributes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44741,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ARCHIV FUR GESCHICHTE DER PHILOSOPHIE\",\"volume\":\"104 1\",\"pages\":\"26 - 52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/agph-2018-0053\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ARCHIV FUR GESCHICHTE DER PHILOSOPHIE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/agph-2018-0053\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"ARCHIV FUR GESCHICHTE DER PHILOSOPHIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/agph-2018-0053","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要本研究涉及形而上学Z.11。在确立了只有物体的形式部分在其定义中被陈述,从而构成其本质之后,亚里士多德警告我们不要将形式部分与物质部分分离。在这样做的过程中,他拒绝了小苏格拉底提出的比较。数学(e。 形状)不能等同于自然物体。 g.,动物),因为某些物质部分必须包括在对后者的核算中,而不包括在对前者的核算中。本文的目的是通过考察亚里士多德批评的内容来理解物质在多大程度上对一个物体至关重要。我的重建表明亚里士多德仍然坚持形式主义的观点。苏格拉底的比较被拒绝了,因为它不是从形而上学主体(物质)的定义中去除物质,而是从其属性的定义中删除物质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Removing Matter: Aristotle’s Criticism of Socrates the Younger
Abstract This study is concerned with a crucial passage in Metaphysics Z.11. After having established that only the formal parts of an object are stated in its definition and thus constitute its essence, Aristotle warns us against the process of separating the formal from the material parts. In doing so, he rejects the comparison proposed by Socrates the Younger. Mathematicals (e. g., shapes) cannot be equated to natural objects (e. g., animals) because some material parts must be included in accounting for the latter but not in accounting for the former. The goal of this article is to understand to what extent matter is essential to an object by examining the content of Aristotle’s criticism. My reconstruction shows that Aristotle is still committed to a formalist view. Socrates’ comparison is rejected because it removes matter not from the definitions of the subjects of metaphysics (substances), but from the definitions of their attributes.
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
1.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie [Archive for the History of Philosophy] is one of the world"s leading academic journals specializing in the history of philosophy. The Archiv publishes exceptional scholarship in all areas of western philosophy from antiquity through the twentieth century. The journal insists on the highest scholarly standards and values precise argumentation and lucid prose. Articles should reflect the current state of the best international research while advancing the field"s understanding of a historical author, school, problem, or concept. The journal has a broad international readership and a rich history.
×
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