With overwhelming conviction the standard-interpretation of the Aristotelian philosophy translates the Greek ousia with the Latin substantia. There are many reasons, that this translation and equation is false, in a short overview I name six of them.

Michael J. Loux here presents a fresh reading of two of the most important books of the Metaphysics, Books Z and H, in which Aristotle presents his mature theory of primary substances. Focusing on the interplay of Aristotle's early and late views, Loux maintans that the later concept of ousia should be understood in terms of a theory of predication that carries interesting implications for contemporary metaphysics. Loux argues that in his first attempt in identifying ousiai in the Categories, (...) Aristotle encountered a set of ontological problems which he wrestled with again in Metaphysics Z and H. In the Categories, where the primary realities are basic subjects of predication construed in essentialist terms as things falling under natural kinds, familiar particulars are the primary ousiai. In subsequent works, Aristotle holds that since familiar particulars come into being and pass away, they must be composites of matter and form; and in Metaphysics Z and H, he explores the implications of this insight for the search for ousia. Maintaining that the substantial forms of familiar particulars are the primary ousiai, the later Aristotle interprets forms as predicable universals rather than as particulars, each uniquely possessed by a single object. (shrink)

Gemass ihrer grundlegenden Bedeutung wurde die Ousia- und Eidoslehre des Aristoteles uber viele Forschergenerationen hinweg intensiv diskutiert und steht immer noch im Mittelpunkt der Aristoteles-Forschung. Die Lehre bleibt jedoch nur einseitig interpretiert und verstanden. Ihre bisherige Interpretation hat sich allzu sehr auf die sogenannten Substanzbucher der Metaphysik beschrankt, ohne dabei den der Lehre wesentlichen biologischen Aspekten gebuhrende Beachtung zu schenken. Der Autor schliesst diese Forschungslucke. So wird im ersten Teil des Werkes Metaphysik Z, der Haupttext der Ousialehre, sorgfaltig kommentiert, (...) und im anschliessenden zweiten Teil werden unter Bezugnahme auf die im vorhergehenden Teil erorterte Problematik drei wichtigste biologische Schriften des Aristoteles besprochen. Dadurch wird ein wesentlicher Zusammenhang zwischen der Ousia- und Eidoslehre in der Metaphysik und der Biologie hergestellt. (shrink)

In der 1970 gegründeten Reihe erscheinen Arbeiten, die philosophiehistorische Studien mit einem systematischen Ansatz oder systematische Studien mit philosophiehistorischen Rekonstruktionen verbinden. Neben deutschsprachigen werden auch englischsprachige Monographien veröffentlicht. Gründungsherausgeber sind: Erhard Scheibe (Herausgeber bis 1991), Günther Patzig (bis 1999) und Wolfgang Wieland (bis 2003). Von 1990 bis 2007 wurde die Reihe von Jürgen Mittelstraß mitherausgegeben.

Trying to reconstruct the specific definition of the noetic act from some excerpts of the fifth and seventh Treatises (Enneads, V, 9 and 4), one manages to circumscribe the operations by which Plotinus establishes in the context the unity between the intellect, the act of thinking, some form of «prime intelligibility» and the other, multiple, intelligibilities. Plotinus is striving to avoid several pitfalls in order not to endanger the unity of the noetic hypostasis and consequently to imperil the only possible (...) way of thinking the One. At least four ways of bypassing possible impediments detectable in the context mentioned can be summarised : (i) averting the idea that the noetic act can be identified to the form and can thus be defined as «the thinking of forms» ; (ii) establishing that the precession of being as an «object of thought» is an a posteriori act of thought, and not the actual and necessary preeminence of the being on the noetic act ; (iii) debunking any temptation of considering thought as a mediation between the first and the second hypostasis ; and finally (iv) avoiding a definition of the noetic act through a sine qua non recourse to power, by establishing a specific statutary order of the noûs according to which the act and the power determine, or not, the possibility of intellection. An analysis of the texts will bring us to reconsider the so‑called theory of the two complementary acts and its Aristotelian origins, and also to recall the debates around Plotinus’ «idealism», demonstrating the appositeness and the specificities of that conception. (shrink)

Fruit d'une large collaboration interuniversitaire, cet ouvrage, qui fait suite a une publication consacree a eidos, idea et morphe, expose les resultats d'une enquete qui a porte sur tous les emplois du mot ousia dans la philosophie grecque jusqu'a Aristote ; il commence par un apercu des significations du mot dans la litterature non philosophique. Est ainsi offert un cadre de reference exhaustif pour l'etude d'une notion qui compte parmi les plus importantes et aussi les plus complexes de l'histoire (...) de la philosophie. Chacune des uvres concernees de Platon et d'Aristote fait l'objet d'un examen systematique, suivi d'un bilan partiel. Des conclusions generales recapitulent la polysemie foisonnante d'ousia, qui va de l'avoir aux differentes facettes de l'etre, et en font voir aussi l'evolution ainsi que les principaux enjeux philosophiques. Trois outils de travail s'y ajoutent: une riche bibliographie, un index de toutes les occurrences d'ousia chez Platon et chez Aristote ainsi qu'un index de plus de 200 mots grecs apparaissant dans ce champ semantique. (shrink)

The initial dilemma. I.1. The gradual rise of the Metaphysics. I.2. A bold contribution from textual history. I.3. A new perspective on late ancient commentaries. I.4. First philosophy or Metaphysics? I.5. Can tradition be ignored? II. ‘Being’ and οὐσία at the core of Aristotle’s theoretical research. II.1. Ontology as a science of ‘being’ in Aristotle: “What is X?” in the foreground. II.2. The first caveat: the copula function of Aristotle’s ‘being’. II.3. The definite article τό as quotation marks before the (...) flexed forms of ‘be’: τὸ ὄν, τὸ εἶναι, τὸ ἔστιν. II.4. Further explanations about Aristotle’s ‘being’. III. Οὐσία, the core of Aristotle’s theoretical philosophy. III.1. οὐσία and the criterion of pre‑eminence as Plato’s legacy. III.2. The dialectical roots of ontology. III.3. οὐσία from Zeta to Lambda. III.4. οὐσία as essence and οὐσία as substance. III.5. οὐσία as a syntactical core; the word’s etymology. III.6. οὐσία as the first sense of being in Aristotle’s first philosophy. III.7. Ontology as science, science of the science. IV. Historicizing: the semantic gap. IV.1. Editorial tradition: ontology and οὐσία as a fil rouge in the order of Metaphysics books. IV.2. οὐσία in the first century B.C. IV.3. οὐσία by Alexander of Aphrodisias. IV.4. Metaphysics and its purpose: the role of the Lambda book. IV.5. Being and οὐσία: a relationship lost over time. IV.6. The Aristotelian tradition as a way to cooperation. (shrink)

This paper examines some difficulties in Aristotle’s argument in Metaphysics VII 3 and proposes a point of view in which there is no serious conflict between ousia taken as hypokeimenon and ousia taken as eidos.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the basic meaning of ousia in Plato’s philosophical use of the term. “Basic” is not intended as “the strongest”, let alone “exclusive”, insofar as the semantics of ousia encompasses a variety of philosophical meanings. On the contrary, the basic meaning is proposed to be the elementary semantic component of ousia, which is present in the background of Plato’s quasi‑technical use of the term and marks the difference from its ordinary (...) meaning. In view of this, a “genetic” aspect is firstly considered, that is, the connection with the Socratic question “What is X?”. Thereafter, a brief mention to Plato’s conception of language and its relation to reality is made, focusing on the notion of eponymy. This because Plato’s coinage of the philosophical semantics of ousia gives this term the role of an eponym, in the sense that its prominent value is the reference to the Forms, but this does not exclude that it may refer to other types of entities. In the last two sections of the paper, a number of passages from Plato’s works are examined to show that the basic meaning of ousia ultimately is “determined existence”, inasmuch as it designates any thing existing with its own peculiar feature. For ousiai can be empirical things as well as Forms, which implies that the meaning of Plato’s ousia should not be understood in the light of an substance/accident relation. (shrink)

ABSTRACTAristotle submits to Parmenides’ criterion of simplicity and he tries to cope with the phenomena of complexity by grading ontological status. He lowers the ontological status of accidents because of their dependence using another of Parmenides’ criteria, namely that of independence. Later Aristotle introduced potentiality to keep a simple substance by allowing for implicit complexity. He also prevented first matter from disturbing the simplicity of substance by denying it any ontological status. In the fourteenth century a really simple (...) substance was achieved by Occam by transferring all accidents and even the essence as concepts into the mind. That was a specious solution of the problem of complexity. Epistemology cannot solve ontological problems. The more satisfactory alternative is to admit explicit complexes. Parmenides’ argument against complexity is not sound. One can credit Meinong for being the first to make that move. My own ontology has explicit complexes, namely facts. (shrink)

Aristotle's views on the fundamental nature of reality are usually taken to be inconsistent. The two main sources for these views are the Categories and the central books of the Metaphysics, particularly book Zeta. In the early theory of the Categories the basic entities of the world are concrete objects such as Socrates: Aristotle calls them 'primary substances'. But the later theory awards this title to the forms of concrete objects. Michael Wedin proposes a compatibilist solution to this long-standing puzzle, (...) arguing that Aristotle is engaged in quite different projects in the two works. The theory of Metaphysics Zeta is meant to explain central features of the standing doctrine of the Categories, and so presupposes the essential truth of the early theory. The Categories offers a theory of underlying ontological configurations, while book Zeta gives form the status of primary substance because it is primarily the form of a concrete object that explains its nature, and this form is the substance of the object. So when the late theory identifies primary substance with form, it appeals to an explanatory primacy that is quite distinct from the ontological primacy that dominates the Categories. Wedin's new interpretation thus allows us to see the two treatises as complementing each other: they are parts of a unified history of substance. (shrink)

Aristotle's views on the fundamental nature of reality are usually taken to be inconsistent. The two main sources for these views are the Categories and the central books of the Metaphysics, particularly book Zeta. In the early theory of the Categories the basic entities of the world are concrete objects such as Socrates: Aristotle calls them 'primary substances'. But the later theory awards this title to the forms of concrete objects. Michael Wedin proposes a compatibilist solution to this long-standing puzzle, (...) arguing that Aristotle is engaged in quite different projects in the two works. The theory of Metaphysics Zeta is meant to explain central features of the standing doctrine of the Categories, and so presupposes the essential truth of the early theory. The Categories offers a theory of underlying ontological configurations, while book Zeta gives form the status of primary substance because it is primarily the form of a concrete object that explains its nature, and this form is the substance of the object. So when the late theory identifies primary substance with form, it appeals to an explanatory primacy that is quite distinct from the ontological primacy that dominates the Categories. Wedin's new interpretation thus allows us to see the two treatises as complementing each other: they are parts of a unified history of substance. (shrink)

Résumé On sait comment le choix du terme latin substantia est inséparable d’une interprétation de l’ ousia aristotélicienne comme d’un sujet (stable) recevant des propriétés ou accidents. Cette interprétation de l’étant n’a toutefois pas été exclusive chez les premiers auteurs latins qui se sont approprié la doctrine aristotélicienne des catégories. Marius Victorinus et Boèce se sont en effet attachés, l’un comme l’autre, mais selon des approches distinctes, à un autre sens de l’être : dans cette optique, ce qui est (...) demande à être envisagé, non pas en termes de sujet (subiectum), mais en termes d’acte ( actus, mais aussi opus/operatio ). L’article examine la manière dont cette attention portée à l’acte transmet sans doute, mais en même temps modifie la thématique aristotélicienne de l’ ousia hôs energeia. (shrink)

La problématique philosophique d’Erigène – catégories, universaux, individuation – se noue autour de la notion d’ousia, comprise soit comme l’essence générale, genre suprême unique, soit comme substance particulière. En opposition aux Catégories, Jean Scot défend un réalisme radical, concevant l’individuation comme accidentelle et le particulier comme un rassemblement de propriétés universelles. Guillaume de Champeaux reprendra cette position dans sa théorie réaliste dite de l’essence matérielle.

One of the main difficulties that Neoplatonic commentators of Aristotle face is the different treatment that the Categories and the Metaphysics offer to the question of the substance. After describing briefly the status quaestionis ousiae in Aristotle, and after tracing the main Neoplatonic interpretations of this doctrine, this article attempts to demonstrate that the Neoplatonists of Athens and Alexandria, Syrianus and Ammonius, inaugurate a new interpretation of the Aristotelian doctrine. With regard to the category of substance in general (...) and to the question of substantiality of “immanent form” in particular, this new interpretation goes beyond the positions of Plotinus and Porphyry and returns the ontological value to the Aristotelian substances. Unlike Plotinus, who recognized as ousia only that one intelligible, that is five genres of the Platonic Sophist, and unlike Porphyry, who defused the anti–Platonic fuse of the Categories, giving to this treaty a mainly semantic skopos, these philosophers, through their original study of the theory of the three states of katholou, already shed in the Porphyrian Eisagôgê, fit the immanent forms of Aristotle, recognized as substances and as a reflection of the transcendental universal, into the late antique Neoplatonic metaphysical triadic structure. (shrink)

In his critic of the doctrine of Bardaisan, Ephrem the Syrian devotes a lot of space to reflection on the meaning of the terms ītutā and ītyā which, as he denounces, are used inaccurately by his opponent. These Syriac terms can be translated by “being” or “essence”, but also by “substance”. This observation leads us to propose the comparison with the Greek term οὐσία, taking into account many difficulties raised by its uses in theological discourse. The article is devoted (...) to the analysis of the uses of the terms ītutā and ītyā ‑ by Ephrem and by Bardaisan ‑ in their different ways of describing the divine essence. This comparison reveals the peculiarities of the two systems of thought and also their connections with the Greek philosophical doctrines. (shrink)

Résumé L’un des canaux par lesquels la philosophie néoplatonicienne s’est trouvée assimilée à la théologie chrétienne (et plus particulièrement la théologie trinitaire) est la lecture que le rhéteur Marius Victorinus a pu faire de l’œuvre de Plotin, fondateur du néoplatonisme. L’ontologie plotinienne exerce en effet une triple influence sur la théologie de Marius Victorinus. En premier lieu, l’articulation plotinienne entre l’ ousia et le mouvement intelligibles (qui apparaît dans le traité 43) fournit l’un des modèles possibles du rapport entre (...) le Père et le Fils. Ensuite, la transcendance de l’Un se trouve intégrée par Victorinus au sein de la Trinité, et permet de penser l’ existentia du Père, pure de toute détermination. Enfin, le mouvement d’autoconstitution de l’Intellect plotinien, qui est la source immanente de ses propres actes, se trouve repris pour saisir la manière dont le Fils déploie et manifeste l’essence du Père. (shrink)

Aristotle’s concept of subject, or hypokeimenon, has been understudied in scholarship, in part because, since Aristotle associates it with his concept of ousia or substance, discussion of hypokeimenon is often eclipsed by that of substance. It is often thought that Aristotle introduces hypokeimenon as the criterion for being a substance in his Categories. In this essay I argue that he does not, thus calling into question some entrenched views about Aristotelian substance. Divorcing hypokeimenon from (...) class='Hi'>substance in this way emphasizes the need for an account of hypokeimenon in its own right. In this essay I also begin this work by using an often overlooked pointer in Categories towards a discussion in An. Po., in whose context Aristotle's logical notion of hypokeimenon begins to become more clear. (shrink)

The present article discusses the emergence of the term “substance”. It is shown that while the word obviously has its roots in Greek language and tradition, it presupposes a much broader context. Thus, to comprehend the full meaning of the term one must take into account the whole philosophical tradition in which it occurs and the whole of reality to which it refers. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that from the very beginning ousia was linked to that which exists (...) actually and constitutes the internal principle of being. This causal nature of the substance is frequently overlooked and the sense of the word is very often reduced to an eternal and immutable substrate. (shrink)

Normal 0 21 false false false ES-CO X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabla normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} The very core of the Aristotelian philosophy, where the great metaphysical issues tackled by his predecessors (especially Plato and the philosophers from the Academy) were reconsidered, is structured around the notions of being (einai, tó ón), (...) class='Hi'>substance (ousía) and form (eidos, tó ti en einai), largely discussed by Aristotle in the central books of Metaphysics. The understanding of the solutions provided by Aristotle to the aporethic questions formulated and developed by him in the Beta and Kappa 1-2 books concerning the proper object of the first philosophy, the determination of the existent substances as well as the determination of the nature of the first principles of reality, depend all of them on the correct interpretation of such notions. (shrink)

Science (episteme) -- Division of the sciences according to aims and objects -- Demonstration (apodeixis) -- The axioms of the sciences -- Being or substance (ousia) -- Being before aristotle -- Being in the categories -- The science of being: first philosophy -- Being in metaphysics zeta -- Nature (physis) -- Principles of change -- The four causes or explanations (aitiai) -- Defense of teleology -- Soul (psyche) -- Soul as substance, form and actuality -- What the (...) student of soul investigates -- Perception -- Thought -- Success (eudaimonia) -- The practical science of ethics -- The chief and final good for human beings -- Virtues of character -- Virtues of intellect. (shrink)

Cet ouvrage reproduit les actes du VIe Symposium aristotelicum de 1978 qui fut exclusivement consacre a la Metaphysique d'Aristote. Delaissant volontairement les problematiques generales, les etudes rassemblees ici se consacrent a l'examen des passages les plus aporetiques de l'ouvrage, et aux questions fondamentales qui s'y nouent, subordonnant ainsi les controverses sur l'unite du traite a la saisie du sens de ses analyses les plus profondes. C'est dans cette perspective que les differents livres de la Metaphysique sont interroges, et que les (...) concepts de forme, de matiere, de simple, de substance (ousia), d'activite, sont mis en rapport pour tenter de determiner la nature et l'objet de cette science de l'etant en tant qu'etant au moment de sa fondation. Ces etudes font egalement place a une recherche qui met en rapport la problematique et la methode de la Metaphysique avec celles du Sophiste de Platon en amont, et en aval avec la pensee de Plotin, pour saisir la pensee d'Aristote dans la double perspective d'un heritage et d'une filiation. Presentant en outre a la suite de chaque contribution un resume de la discussion a laquelle elle donna lieu, le present recueil rappelle quelles taches un ouvrage aussi eminemment aporetique que la Metaphysique assigne a la pensee chaque fois qu'elle en reprend le cheminement et cherche a en saisir le sens. (shrink)

"Act" or "Actuality" traduces two words coined by Aristotle: energeia and entelecheia. The first meaning of energeia is movement (kinesis). The second meaning designs the end of movement: form, substance (ousia), essence. Here entelecheia is brought to design that final state in which things reach their end and perfection. The third meaning or application of ener-geia, and derivately of entelecheia, is operation, action, function (ergon).

: Aristotle's metaphysics has stimulated intense renewed debate in the past twenty years. Much of the discussion has focused on Metaphysics Z, Aristotle's fascinating and difficult investigation of substance (ousia), and to a lesser extent on H and Θ. The place of the central books within the larger project of First Philosophy in the Metaphysics has engaged scholars since antiquity, and that relationship has also been reexamined. In addition, scholars have been exploring the Metaphysics from various broader perspectives—first, (...) in relation to Aristotle's natural philosophy, his physics, biology, and psychology, and to the Organon, his so-called "logical" works, which include the Categories, Topics, and Posterior Analytics; and second, in relation to the broader philosophical tradition, both Plato before him and the ancient commentary tradition in late antiquity. (shrink)

Pavel Florenskij's (1882-1937/summarily executed in GULAG) conception of the personality is connected to considerations of antinomies. The personality remains trapped in contradictions and gains completion only in relation to the Absolute, whereas the individual, the sociological entity, is metaphysically neutral. Florenskij attempts to link the individual and the personality by means of the concept of substance (ousia). "In man oύσiα and ύπόστασις exist together. Ousia (...) posits the Individual and in society endows him with form as a (...) selfsufficient centre. The hypostasis, by contrast, is the personal idea of Man". For Florenskij personality evinces an epistemological analogy to other central terms in his philosophy, in particular Truth and Love as well as to his theory of language and symbols. For him, each personality comprises a distinctive principle growth (a notion evidently taken from the idealistic morphology of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries) that determines its growth potential. (shrink)

This paper is my first effort to revaluate the disagreement between two central texts for Aristotle's the conception of ousia: Categories and Metaphysics VII. Scholars have taken chapter Zeta-3 as a payment of the debt with the Categories, so that the hylomorphic analysis of the composite substance would require a revision of the subject-criterion, now improved by the addition of the “a this” and “separate” criterion. This paper, however, downgrades the importance of the Categories for understanding Aristotle's Metaphysics (...) Z. The two texts are dealing with different arguments and are not incompatible with one another. I myself consider this paper somehow obsolete, for I have returned to the same subject more than once: in my 2003 paper on Z-3 and, most importantly, on my Book 'As Noções Aristotélicas de Substância e Essência' (2008). (shrink)

A coletânea apresenta, sob a forma de artigos, problemas e soluções associados ao conceito e substância ao longo da história da filosofia. Sem pretender exaurir esse percurso, a coletânea contém 29 artigos redigidos por diversos especialistas brasileiros em Filosofia. Sua proposta é oferecer uma visão clara, acessível, precisa e atualizada desse recorte da história do conceito de filosofia, na expectativa de contribuir para o aperfeiçoamento do ensino e debate de filosofia no país. -/- The anthology presents, through a series of (...) articles, the intricacies of problems and solutions intertwined with the concept of substance across the annals of philosophical history. While not seeking to comprehensively cover this vast terrain, the collection comprises 29 articles penned by a diverse array of Brazilian specialists in Philosophy. Its overarching aim is to furnish a lucid, accessible, precise, and contemporaneous perspective on this facet of philosophical inquiry, with the aspiration of enriching the landscape of philosophical education and discourse in Brazil. (shrink)

Analysis and critical study of all the occurrences of ousia in Aristotle's Physics.

"Any linguistic study of the Greek verb be is essentially conditioned, and perhaps ultimately motivated, by the philosophic career of this word. We know what an extraordinary career it has been. It seems fair to say, with Benveniste, that the systematic development of a concept of Being in Greek philosophy from Parmenides to Aristotle, and then in a more mechanical way from the Stoics to Plotinus, relies upon the pre-existing disposition of the language to make a very general and diversified (...) use of the verb einai. Furthermore, insofar as the notions expressed by on, einai, and ousia in Greek underlie the doctrines of Being, substance, essence, and existence in Latin, in Arabic, and in modern philosophy from Descartes to Heidegger and perhaps to Quine, we may say that the usage of the Greek verb be studied here forms the historical basis for the ontological tradition of the West, as the very term "ontology" suggests. At the same time it is generally recognized that this wide range of uses for the single verb eimi in Greek reflects a state of affairs which is "peculiar to Indo-European languages, and by no means a universal situation or a necessary condition." (1) The present monograph series on "the verb 'be' and its synonyms" shows just how far the languages of the earth may differ from one another in their expression for existence, for predication with nouns or with adjectives, for locative predication, and so forth. The topic of be can itself scarcely be defined except by reference to Indo-European verbs representing the root *es-. The question naturally arises whether an historical peculiarity of this kind can be of any fundamental importance for general linguistics and, even more pressing, whether a concept reflecting the Indo-European use of *es- can be of any general significance in philosophy.". (shrink)

Les Stoïciens formulent une conception de la «substance», ou ousia, qui tient un rôle très important dans différentes parties de leur système, parmi lesquelles la cosmologie, la psychologie et l'éthique. Au concept de substance est liée ce qu.on appelle la table des quatre 'catégories'. Cette dernière est considéréepar certains interprètes récents comme l'issue d'un processus historique relativement long, qui trouve sa formulation achevée seulement avec Chrysippe. Les sources relatives à la théorie des quatre catégories forment, comme on (...) le sait, une tradition indirecte et dans une large mesure également hostile, parce qu'elle est transmise surtout par Plutarque, Plotin et les commentateurs aristotéliciens des Catégories. Pourtant, ces sources permettent de saisir certaines des questions qui sont au centre de la réflexion stoïcienne sur l'être. Parmi les plus significatives, il y a la question du rapport entre substance et matière, et la question de la signification de la substance individuelle. (shrink)

Les Stoïciens formulent une conception de la «substance», ou ousia, qui tient un rôle très important dans différentes parties de leur système, parmi lesquelles la cosmologie, la psychologie et l'éthique. Au concept de substance est liée ce qu.on appelle la table des quatre 'catégories'. Cette dernière est considéréepar certains interprètes récents comme l'issue d'un processus historique relativement long, qui trouve sa formulation achevée seulement avec Chrysippe. Les sources relatives à la théorie des quatre catégories forment, comme on (...) le sait, une tradition indirecte et dans une large mesure également hostile, parce qu'elle est transmise surtout par Plutarque, Plotin et les commentateurs aristotéliciens des Catégories. Pourtant, ces sources permettent de saisir certaines des questions qui sont au centre de la réflexion stoïcienne sur l'être. Parmi les plus significatives, il y a la question du rapport entre substance et matière, et la question de la signification de la substance individuelle. (shrink)

The aim of this article is to free Aristotle's Metaphysics, especially book XII (Lambda), frome some metaphysical and theological presuppositions by detecting their inappropriate conceptual framwork, which once was progressive, but now holds an obsolete position. Ousia, being (not substance, a much later concept, construed to solve other problems than Aristotle's), stand for a question, not for an answer. Book Lambda develops a highly speculative argument for this queston. The famous noesis noeseos says that empirical being and knowledge (...) is the realization of a noetic structure (noesis), laid down in our most fundamental opinioons about being. (shrink)

In this paper, I begin with the most basic tenet in Aristotelian metaphysics, namely that ousia or ‘substance’ is ontologically prior to the nine other categories of being, including the pros ti, the condition of being literally ‘toward something’ or what is sometimes called 'relation' or ‘relationality.’ Aristotle repeats this frequently throughout his works and it is, I take it, manifest. However, in the Politics, so I argue here, Aristotle’s dialectical study of common appearances leads him to describe (...) ‘human being’ in a way that runs contrary to this. That is, insofar as the human being is the zoon politikon or ‘political animal,’ it seems to be constituted as the being it is precisely by way of its relatedness to other human beings in the polis. I then try to determine the moment of ‘birth’ for this essentially relational being, and find that it may not be the emergence of the human from the womb, but rather, at least according to this interpretation of the Politics, the moment when we enter into the logos together with others in posing, discussing, debating, and re-posing the abidingly open question of the human Good. (shrink)

In this paper, I begin with the most basic tenet in Aristotelian metaphysics, namely that ousia or ‘substance’ is ontologically prior to the nine other categories of being, including the pros ti, the condition of being literally ‘toward something’ or what is sometimes called 'relation' or ‘relationality.’ Aristotle repeats this frequently throughout his works and it is, I take it, manifest. However, in the Politics, so I argue here, Aristotle’s dialectical study of common appearances leads him to describe (...) ‘human being’ in a way that runs contrary to this. That is, insofar as the human being is the zoon politikon or ‘political animal,’ it seems to be constituted as the being it is precisely by way of its relatedness to other human beings in the polis. I then try to determine the moment of ‘birth’ for this essentially relational being, and find that it may not be the emergence of the human from the womb, but rather, at least according to this interpretation of the Politics, the moment when we enter into the logos together with others in posing, discussing, debating, and re-posing the abidingly open question of the human Good. (shrink)

There are two reasons why Christian theology introduces the concept of the absolute nothing into its doctrine of creation. Firstly, unlike platonic non-being, the absolute nihil is not eternally co-existent with God and it does not limit His creative freedom. We notice that God’s freedom is identified with the freedom to create. Platonic non-being represented a necessity. To create, therefore, means to be able to overcome every form of necessity. The concept of the absolute nothing, therefore, needs to provide an (...) ontological ground for the creation of the absolute novum. Sergius Bulgakov and Nikolai Berdyaev, the authors I am quoting in this essay, agree that the apology of the world is inconceivable on the level of monistic ontology, for which substance or ousia is the main category. They are aware that simultaneous communion and otherness between God and the world is imaginable only on the level of the person or hypostasis. Christian theology introduces absolute nothing to secure God’s creative freedom. God is free if He can overcome givenness and create a newness in being. But Bulgakov stresses that to “create out of nothing” means that God creates out of Himself. God can create only what is already given in Him. Berdyaev’s God does not create out of Himself but out of uncreated freedom. Berdyaev explicitly confirms uncreatedness of freedom by stressing that this freedom is outside of God. This is why God can break through the givenness of the world and create an absolute newness. (shrink)

Proceedings of two study days held in Paris and Oxford about a recurring conceptual triad: ousia, dynamis and energeia, active in Ancient thought and practices, either philosophical or not.

The paper starts from a distinction between two terms in Aristotle: kategoroumenon and kategoria. It is argued that the job of the first is to pick out 'predicated predicates' (i.e. predicates attached to a specific subject), the job of the second is to designate 'predicable predicates' (terms which can be attached to specific subjects). It is then argued (1) that Aristotle's division of the (erroneously) so-called 'predicables' (i. e. genus, proprium, definiens, accident) is a classification of predicated predicates, (2) that (...) the list of the "genera of kategoriai" in Top. I 9 which starts with ti estin (essence) as its first member contains a classification of predicable predicates, and (3) that the list in Cat. 4 (starting with ousia, 'substance') is a classification not of kategoriai, but of things there are. (shrink)

The origin of Being as a live concept is one of the most difficult questions in history of metaphysics and ontology. This work analyses the postulate that being is constructed by the interaction of terms. In fact, being and the idea of Being has come from the possibility of relations. It is known that metaphysics and ontology has overestimated think Being like something that never change, a substance unchangeable. Reduce Being as ousía, translated as substance, does not understand (...) central affirmation of Aristotle that “The term “being” is used in various senses, but with reference to one central idea and one definite characteristic, and not as merely a common epithet.”. The usually interpretation of relations make them one of those ways, however the concept of Being is always under a relation. Is reconsidered the role of relations in the basis of ontological thinking, taking the renewal of metaphysics, of the French philosopher Jean Wahl, and postulating that Being as totality is the relation that involves beings, Change and Time. (shrink)

As is well enough known, the term physis in Empedocles Fr. 8 is cited by Aristotle in the Metaphysics as meaning the ousia of natural things, in the sense of the stable substance or form that is the terminus of generation. This interpretation is rejected almost unanimously by commentators. The three or four attempts to defend it have not proved convincing. The case now seems officially closed. Yet there remain some loose ends. These are of the kind that (...) would keep bothering television detectives and would cause enough loss of sleep to prompt a fresh investigation of a whole case. Is that procedure called for here? (shrink)

Se indaga la relación que se da en la República entre los dos significados de ousia: como propiedad en el sentido de posesiones y riqueza, o en el sentido de esencia o sustancia. Aparte de las relaciones económicas asociadas al préstamo, al intercambio y al interés, se examina la función que, respecto de la ousia, cumple la moneda en la economía como recurso para disociar la riqueza de las posesiones, con lo cual logra un nivel de universalidad y (...) equivalencia equiparable al del propio ser. The article inquires into the relation established in the Republic between the two meanings of ousia: property in the sense of possessions and wealth, and essence or substance. Besides the economic relations associated with loans, exchange, and interest, the paper examines the role of currency in the economy, with respect to ousia, as a means of dissociating wealth from possessions, thus achieving a degree of universality comparable to that of being itself. (shrink)

Aristotelian Philosophy, as far as its subject matter is Being, conceives of it as “ousia,” substance. This actual, self-sufficient Being contrasts with the dependent Being of the “symbekóta,” accidents, nonsubstantial attributes. Real Being, existence was of no interest for Antique Philosophy. It was as late as in Scholastic Philosophy that the concept of “existere” gained interest in connection with the problem of universals and the proofs of God’s existence. Albert the Great uses this concept in connection with the (...) concept of a person. (shrink)