The One of Plotinus and the God of Aristotle

Review of Metaphysics 27 (1):75 - 87 (1973)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

All this might be of only antiquarian interest, the ramifications of a supposedly long-outworn metaphysic. But Plotinus’ critique of Aristotle and consequent development of his own position present a number of features of wider interest. First of all, in contrast to much preceding Greek "theology," Plotinus’ One may not be anthropomorphic. Early Greek philosophers, like Xenophanes, had criticized the poets and mythologists on this score, but Plato and Aristotle, in their different ways, are similarly open to attack. For Aristotle mind is what makes each of us a man, rather than an animal. Men cannot, it is true, use their minds on the non-contingent all the time; gods can. But the difference looks to be one of degree, not of kind. Mind may perhaps come "from outside," that is, not be part of the body-soul complex, and have an eternal existence in some form, but that only emphasizes the essential similarity of the "human" and the "divine" mind. And in Aristotle all the evidence for the working of mind comes from an examination of human psychology, and from a theory about the way in which we think. The results of this analysis are then applied, in a perfect form, to God. Aristotle’s active intellect, different in each individual man, looks so like the Prime Mover that the better commentators have often failed to distinguish them. Certainly they should be distinguished, but the commentator can hardly be blamed for failing to do so, when he is faced with the difficulty, very real to him at least, that otherwise Aristotle would come near to postulating a non-identity of indiscernibles—except that the Prime Mover is in some sense a bigger and better example of mind than the active intellect. And Aristotle’s problem is Plato’s too. No one has yet explained satisfactorily why Plato distinguishes so sharply—for example in the myth of the Phaedrus-between souls and gods. That there must be a difference is clear enough; souls may fall, gods do not. But how can a fall be possible when a purified soul looks so like a god?

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Theosophies of Plato, Aristotle and Plotinus.Dibinga Wa Said - 1970 - New York,: Philosophical Library.
Unity, Theism and Self in Plotinus.Donald N. Blakeley - 1992 - Philosophy and Theology 7 (1):53-80.
Plotinus, or, The simplicity of vision.Pierre Hadot - 1993 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Aristotle and Two Medieval Aristotelians on the Nature of God.R. Houser - 2011 - International Philosophical Quarterly 51 (3):355 - 375.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-29

Downloads
65 (#239,555)

6 months
9 (#242,802)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references