31–40 of 99 posts
His ideas provide a useful filter with words personal qualities, and the moderation of virtues in Nichomchean Ethics pretty much describes what it means when we say someone is 'honest.' it's a foundational read, along with the stoics. the provocative aspect of Aristotle today is that for people who see themselves as not on the level of citizens and who reject being compared by the virtues he (and later, aquinas) arti…
I think Aristotle had the greatest mind of any human who ever lived. The older I get the more I realize that there are a thousand true and intelligent things you can say about any topic. Magazines, journals, and libraries are full to the brim of intelligent people writing intelligent things. But an extremely minuscule portion of that huge mass is made of writing that gets right to the heart of the matter. And Aristot…
On the other hand deification of Aristotle's intellect and thought hampered the development of physics for almost 1500 years.
European philosophy was not really Aristotelian until the re-arrival of his work in the 12C, so it's hardly fair to 'blame' him for the lack of scientific development that period. When it did arrive, it was extremely controversial, and it took the genius of Aquinas (and even then, only just) for Aristotle to be accepted in Christian thought.
In the 17C, there was a much greater interest in quantitative methods than there had been previously. And some of his physics was obviously found to be wrong. But there was no discovery (and remains no discovery) that falsified broad swathes of his work. The change of interest and focus was far more important in the progress of what we now call science than the supposed rejection of Aristotle.
This is described in E.A. Burtt's Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science.
Pre-modern people were far more interested in living a morally good life (a happy life, in the Aristotelian sense of the word) than they were in controlling nature. That changed in the 17C.
His ideas provide a useful filter with words personal qualities, and the moderation of virtues in Nichomchean Ethics pretty much describes what it means when we say someone is 'honest.' it's a foundational read, along with the stoics. the provocative aspect of Aristotle today is that for people who see themselves as not on the level of citizens and who reject being compared by the virtues he (and later, aquinas) arti…
Not in your essence. All people are equal in their essence. But it's better to be a person who's truthful than a person who constantly lies. So in that sense, a truthful person is better than a liar.
Anyway, the beauty is that anyone can attain these virtues. It's very, very hard work, but even the pursuit brings very great joy.
(Being 'ambitious' is not a virtue, btw :-) )
His ideas provide a useful filter with words personal qualities, and the moderation of virtues in Nichomchean Ethics pretty much describes what it means when we say someone is 'honest.' it's a foundational read, along with the stoics. the provocative aspect of Aristotle today is that for people who see themselves as not on the level of citizens and who reject being compared by the virtues he (and later, aquinas) arti…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand deification of Aristotle's intellect and thought hampered the development of physics for almost 1500 years.
This is not (really) true. Well there's an element of truth in it, but only an element. European philosophy was not really Aristotelian until the re-arrival of his work in the 12C, so it's hardly fair to 'blame' him for the lack of scientific development that period. When it did arrive, it was extremely controversial, and it took the genius of Aquinas (and even then, only just) for Aristotle to be accepted in Christi…
His ideas provide a useful filter with words personal qualities, and the moderation of virtues in Nichomchean Ethics pretty much describes what it means when we say someone is 'honest.' it's a foundational read, along with the stoics. the provocative aspect of Aristotle today is that for people who see themselves as not on the level of citizens and who reject being compared by the virtues he (and later, aquinas) arti…
I wager the movement is less a rebellion of the few, and more the unbelief of the many. That is, people just don't believe there's a personal benefit to being virtuous. It's a completely rational calculation when there's no deep spiritual or religious belief in far-off rewards or punishments. Unfortunately, our age's contempt for belief in the "deep down" turns people to worship physical characteristics & preferences instead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is addressed in the article.
Addressed how? Just a meek claim that Artistotle may have been misinterpreted. Meek because the author knowingly can't argue with Aristotle's own stringent defense of the "right kind" of slavery.
1. Conflating intellectual greatness with moral goodness. These are separate categories.
2. Applying current moral standards to a previous time. You must compare him to others if his time.
Slavery is unquestionably immoral, and it's perfectly reasonable to argue that someone completing philosophical work to support slavery is committing a moral wrong, but you have to keep in mind the society into which this person was enculturated and the time at which he lived.
Its quite difficult to rationalize and demystify the depth of Ancient Greek thought and Aristotle is probably the best embodiment of that conundrum. It would be quite an educational breakthrough if we could actually feel how and why there was this peak moment in intellectual inquiry, why it did not persist, why it emerged again but only millennia afterwards and whether it may again vanish as we drift into digitally i…
Interesting perspective. I’ve always had a distaste for Aristotle, preferring Plato, but after reading this I’m wondering if that stemmed more from the additional lens of the person introducing him to me. Might have to revisit his work as my older self.
A decent argument can be made that most of modern life is based of Aristotle's metaphysics: * https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/43277412-aristotle-s-rev... And that most 'Western values' are basically Christian in origin (with an undercurrent of Aristotle): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_(Holland_book) * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_WEIRDest_People_in_the_Wor... MacIntyre argues that when it comes to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Addressed how? Just a meek claim that Artistotle may have been misinterpreted. Meek because the author knowingly can't argue with Aristotle's own stringent defense of the "right kind" of slavery.
Is the unstated central thrust of your statement that someone who philosophically supported slavery at a time when it was a widespread practice must necessarily be of average or below average intelligence? If so, I'd argue that you're committing two common missteps I see frequently: 1. Conflating intellectual greatness with moral goodness. These are separate categories. 2. Applying current moral standards to a previo…
Literally yes. A mind too dense to see he was drafting his arguments in support of whatever happened to be personally convenient.
Considering he had to pen this screed in the first place, we can tell his view wasn't the exclusive one.