Biophilia is a concept that has been much utilized as a foundation for an environmental or “land” ethic. E.O. Wilson characterizes it as a genetic disposition that links human survival to valuing living systems. J. Baird Callicott argues that human sentiments are naturally directed to all living systems and beings and this sentiment has evolutionary value. This author contends that if biophilia is to be a viable foundation for such an ethic, it must be conceived more abstractly and broadly as (...) an interconnecting feature of biotic systems. The foundation for such a conception can be found in Aristotle’s ethics, wherein his discussion of friendship, philia, can provide a theory of interspecies obligation. Although Aristotle’s focus in the Nicomachean Ethics is human relations, he makes it clear that this sentiment can be felt towards other living beings. This paper develops a broader conception of philia that includes interspecies relationships and then reconceives the modern concept of biophilia as a form of interspecies philia. It goes on to argue, using Aristotle’s theory of obligation as reciprocity within friendship, that such a re-conception of biophilia might provide another approach to founding an environmental ethic on a theory of sentiment. (shrink)

What does it mean for something to be rational? In deciding whether a belief, action, or desire can be considered rational, philosophers have always ran into the ambiguity between the normative and descriptive uses of the term. For instance, to claim that a belief in God is rational could mean that the belief came through some process of argumentation, or it could mean that this is a good belief for someone to have. Similarly, to say that a desire for wealth (...) and fame is irrational might mean that no process of argument brought it about; or it might simply mean that it is not a good desire to have. This kind of ambiguity is related not only to the fact-value problem, but to the classical distinction between theory and practice. ;Upon careful scrutiny, however, of all the processes involved in making judgments or holding beliefs, that is, inference and the experience upon which it is based, reasoning and the various shapes in which it is found, and reflective as well as nonreflective use of rules serve to establish a continuity between facts and values. At the same time, such a critical scrutiny indicates the real distinction between 'is,' as signifying what is the case, and 'ought,' as signifying what should be the case. ;In performing such a scrutiny, I was forced to perform a double task: first, to develop a set of categorical terms for normative and descriptive rationality; and second, to show the relation between ordinary and technical reasoning, thereby inviting philosophy, and theory in general, to assume its established role in the world of practical affairs. (shrink)

This paper is a discussion of the application of democraticand anti-racist educational principles in a college setting.The paper explores both the implications of pedagogical theoryfor anti-racism and the implications of anti-racism forpedagogy. After giving a brief description of the conditionsencountered in an economically and intellectually impoverishedregion of the country, the paper outlines an application ofJohn Dewey's educational theory to college instruction.Then, after an account of what racism is, the paper reappliesDewey's model to the teaching of anti-racism, and with thehelp of (...) Paulo Freire's theory of educational praxis,readapts Deweyan principles to the task of reconstructingour classrooms as models of anti-racist communities. (shrink)

English summary: The fifth book of Aristotles Metaphysics is presented here in a new French translation with analysis of the books structure and considerable commentary and overview of the significance and often difficult meaning of this essential text. French description: On s'est beaucoup interroge sur le cinquieme livre de la Metaphysique, qui se presente sous la forme de trente notices consacrees a l'etude des differentes significations ou usages de certains termes, dont les raisons du choix n'apparaissent pas d'emblee. Le present (...) travail met en evidence la maniere dont le livre s'integre a l'enquete proprement metaphysique d'Aristote, par l'analyse de ces termes de toute premiere importance philosophique, trop generaux pour etre etudies par une science particuliere, mais indispensables a la connaissance de n'importe quel domaine de l'etre. Une traduction inedite, qui degage la structure du texte, un commentaire approfondi et une synthese originale des significations distinguees permettent une approche nouvelle de ce document celebre. Les auteurs esperent ainsi a la fois faciliter la lecture et la comprehension du texte, et fournir en outre aux specialistes de nombreuses suggestions d'interpretation de passages controverses ou obscurs. (shrink)

La notion de kairos, entendue au sens de « moment opportun », liée à celle de metron — notion dont l'auteur a déjà montré l'importance dans la littérature grecque antique dans son ensemble - intervient de mille manières dans les écrits d'Aristote sur les sciences de la nature. Elle y apparaît sous la forme des catégories temporelles pas-encore ou trop-tôt, et jamais-plus, ou trop-tard. A preuve, différents textes tirés des Météorologiques, de la Génération des animaux, des Parties des animaux et (...) même de la Politique. De ce point de vue, Aristote peut être considéré comme un précurseur de la science moderne. The notion of kairos, understood in its meaning of « opportune moment », combined to that of metron — a notion whose the Author has already shown the importance in ancient Greek literature as a whole -is present in numerous ways in Aristotle's works on the sciences of nature, where it appears under the form of the temporal categories of not yet or too early, and never again or too late. This is confirmed by various selected texts from the Aristotelian works Meteorológica, On the Generation of Animals, On the Parts of Animals and even from the Politics. From this point of view Aristotle may be considered as a forerunner of modern science. (shrink)

It is possible to study the reception of Aristotle's natural philosophy by means of the various tools that were used by intellectuals during the thirteenth century. This type of literature is often forgotten. Four samples are taken here to illustrate the interest of such works, and the information that we can extract from them. The examples are the sermons by Anton of Padua ; an encyclopedia composed by Arnold of Saxony during the second quarter of the thirteenth century, which includes (...) extracts from recent translations mixed together with Neoplatonic passages; an Aristotelian florilegium, which illustrates thirteenth-century censorship of Aristotelian texts; and a translation of the Meteorologica into the vernacular, which documents the popularity of this treatise at the end of the thirteenth century and the creation of a technical vocabulary in old French texts. The third example is an anthology that originated in a Franciscan milieu and was compiled in its definitive form at the end of the 13th century. This latter presents a series of purged texts about natural science. Finally, it discuss the French translation of Aristotle's Meteorology by Mahieu le Vilain, master at the Arts Faculty of the University of Paris at the end of the 13th century. This is the first translation of an Aristotelian treatise into vernacular, allowing us to understand the popularization of this treatise and its importance for the technical vocabulary of this discipline. (shrink)

Seit dem 2. nachchristlichen Jahrhundert werden die Schriften von Aristoteles kommentiert. Diese Ausgabe enthält griechische Kommentare zu seinem Werk vom 3. bis 8. Jahrhundert n. Chr., u. a. von Alexander von Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in griechischer Sprache.

Commentaries on Aristotle's writings have been produced since the 2nd century AD. This edition contains Greek commentaries on his work from the 3rd to the 8th centuries AD by, among others, Alexander of Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in Greek.

Seit dem 2. nachchristlichen Jahrhundert werden die Schriften von Aristoteles kommentiert. Diese Ausgabe enthält griechische Kommentare zu seinem Werk vom 3. bis 8. Jahrhundert n. Chr., u. a. von Alexander von Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in griechischer Sprache.

Seit dem 2. nachchristlichen Jahrhundert werden die Schriften von Aristoteles kommentiert. Diese Ausgabe enthält griechische Kommentare zu seinem Werk vom 3. bis 8. Jahrhundert n. Chr., u. a. von Alexander von Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in griechischer Sprache.

Commentaries on Aristotle's writings have been produced since the 2nd century AD. This edition contains Greek commentaries on his work from the 3rd to the 8th centuries AD by, among others, Alexander of Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in Greek.

RESUMEN Se realiza un estudio comparativo del problema de la percepción en Aristóteles y Maurice Merleau-Ponty, considerando el marco antropológico en el que se inscriben sus propuestas. Se establecen sus posibles puntos de contacto y sus diferencias más importantes. Se presta especial atención al vínculo entre el acto senso-perceptual y el movimiento, así como al problema de la conciencia perceptual y a la cuestión de la actualidad común entre el sentiente y el sensible. ABSTRACT The article provides a comparative study (...) of the problem of perception in Aristotle and Maurice Merleau-Ponty, taking into account the anthropological context that frames their proposals. It establishes their possible points of convergence and their main differences. The study also pays special attention to the link between the sensory-perceptual act and movement, as well as to the problem of perceptual consciousness and the issue of the actuality common to the sentient and sensible aspects. (shrink)

Commentaries on Aristotle's writings have been produced since the 2nd century AD. This edition contains Greek commentaries on his work from the 3rd to the 8th centuries AD by, among others, Alexander of Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in Greek.

Commentaries on Aristotle's writings have been produced since the 2nd century AD. This edition contains Greek commentaries on his work from the 3rd to the 8th centuries AD by, among others, Alexander of Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in Greek.

Seit dem 2. Nachchristlichen Jahrhundert werden die Schriften von Aristoteles kommentiert. DIese Ausgabe enthalt griechische Kommentare zu seinem Werk vom 3. Bis 8. JAhrhundert n. CHr., u. A. Von Alexander von Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. PHiloponus, Simplicius in griechischer Sprache.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:We have here the critical edition of Richard Rufus’s commentary on Aristotle’s treatment of generation and corruption. The Greek philosopher explained how living beings came about and passed on. His text was much studied by scholastics in the latter part of the thirteenth century. Rufus’s commentary is, as far as we know, “the earliest surviving commentary” on the text. Understandably it influenced succeeding commentaries. This edition has come about (...) as the continuation of Rega Wood’s study and use of the one manuscript that has the text, a manuscript that contains other texts ascribed Rufus. Wood used the manuscript for her edition of Aristotle’s In Physicam. In that book she described the manuscript and her use of it for the edition. The edition of In De Generatione et Corruptione follows the critical procedure discussed there. The long introduction to this further edition of a commentary on a work by Aristotle presents the case for its authorship by Rufus, examines the arguments of Rufus, and surveys its influence on later commentators.The key point, of course, is authorship. Did Rufus write the commentary? First the editors show that In Physicam and In De Generatione et Corruptione have a common author. Then, on pages 17–48, they offer their argument for Rufus as author. The two editors tread carefully, for Wood’s argument on Rufus as author of the In Physicam has been contested at length . Once Rufus is established as author, they proceed to date its composition. It is clear that it was written between 1225 and 1245. They narrow the date to “ca. 1232–1236.”The editors’ proof of Rufus’s authorship brings together a number of indications that invite us to look in Rufus’s direction as author. Wood and Lewis have found no evidence out of which Rufus springs, with a smile, confessing: Yes, it is I, Rufus, speaking. Someone did write it, however, and possible authors are definitely not legion. The indications fit our smiling Rufus as they fit no other. It is definitely something that Rufus might well do in the time frame of its production and he would have done it in that way and with those sources. The text lines up well doctrinally with certified Rufus texts, though not verbally. Moreover, the text occurs in the manuscript quires that contain authentic works of Rufus. I do not belong to those who have studied Rufus and his learned production. I understand that there exists actually a critical process that is putting together the writings and the role of Rufus in scholasticism. I find this book’s argument a valid and serious contribution to the process.Once authorship and then date and place of the authoring have been decided, the editors speak to the sources on which Rufus drew and may have drawn. Then they examine three topics, infinite divisibility, growth, and mixture, which show that, however appreciative of Aristotle’s ideas, Rufus was a critical reader of Aristotle’s writings. The editors finish their study of Rufus’s In De Generatione et Corruptione by showing the influence of the text in the history of the following decades.After the thorough scrutiny of the text there comes the critical edition of the text itself. Wood and Lewis follow the method used by Wood in her edition of In Physicam. The edition is an excellent piece of work.It is not without trepidation that I have seen to the publication of this review in Studies. I think it merits a place here, for Studies has published previously on Rufus, while scholarship will not advance if the various contributions to scholarly discussion do not circulate well. (shrink)

One of the first to teach the new Aristotle, Richard Rufus of Cornwall here presents exciting accounts of divisibility, growth, and Aristotelian mixture which transform our understanding of the introduction of Aristotelian natural philosophy to the West and provide insight into the early history and prehistory of chemistry.

Seit dem 2. nachchristlichen Jahrhundert werden die Schriften von Aristoteles kommentiert. Diese Ausgabe enthält griechische Kommentare zu seinem Werk vom 3. bis 8. Jahrhundert n. Chr., u. a. von Alexander von Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in griechischer Sprache.

Christina Thomsen Thörnqvist’s edition of the Anonymus Aurelianensis III – the earliest known Latin commentary on Aristotle’s Prior analytics –, offers the critical text and a systematic comparison with the ancient Greek commentary tradition.

Seit dem 2. nachchristlichen Jahrhundert werden die Schriften von Aristoteles kommentiert. Diese Ausgabe enthält griechische Kommentare zu seinem Werk vom 3. bis 8. Jahrhundert n. Chr., u. a. von Alexander von Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in griechischer Sprache.