Heidegger’s first period in Freiburg (1919-23), where he taught as an assistant of Edmund Husserl, is characterized by a long, intense confrontation with the philosophy of Aristotle, manifested not only in the titles of his university lectures, but also in his explicit intention to write a book on Aristotle. This undertaking will recede in 1924 in Marburg, in view of the decision to write a treatise on time. This treatise will finally be composed in 1926 and will be published in (...) 1927 under the title Being and Time. The shadow of Aristotle, however, still influences his philosophical work after 1924, and particularly in BT. The relevance of Heidegger’s Aristotle-interpretations can be determined in a twofold way: first, by tracing ‘tacit’ elements of Aristotelian thought, as they may emerge through Heidegger’s interpretations, and, secondly, by expounding the way in which the thought of Heidegger himself develops and takes shape in a dialogue with Aristotelian philosophy. Scholars agree that Heidegger’s confrontation with Aristotle does not amount to a passive adoption of Aristotelian positions, distinctions and evaluations, but is a kind of productive adaptation and reinterpretation of the Aristotelian heritage: appropriation, reappropriation, originelle Aneignung, “reinterprets and transforms”– these are the terms in which this relation has been described. But what precisely is the content and nature of this appropriation? A certain confusion is produced by an assumption implicitly shared by the vast majority of scholars, the conviction that Heidegger’s philosophy constitutes a unique corpus and that his thought evolves linearly and uniformly. Τhe paper attempts to challenge this assumption. (shrink)

Heidegger’s first period in Freiburg (1919-23), where he taught as an assistant of Edmund Husserl, is characterized by a long, intense confrontation with the philosophy of Aristotle, manifested not only in the titles of his university lectures, but also in his explicit intention to write a book on Aristotle. This undertaking will recede in 1924 in Marburg, in view of the decision to write a treatise on time. This treatise will finally be composed in 1926 and will be published in (...) 1927 under the title Being and Time. The shadow of Aristotle, however, still influences his philosophical work after 1924, and particularly in BT. The relevance of Heidegger’s Aristotle-interpretations can be determined in a twofold way: first, by tracing ‘tacit’ elements of Aristotelian thought, as they may emerge through Heidegger’s interpretations, and, secondly, by expounding the way in which the thought of Heidegger himself develops and takes shape in a dialogue with Aristotelian philosophy. Scholars agree that Heidegger’s confrontation with Aristotle does not amount to a passive adoption of Aristotelian positions, distinctions and evaluations, but is a kind of productive adaptation and reinterpretation of the Aristotelian heritage: appropriation, reappropriation, originelle Aneignung, “reinterprets and transforms”– these are the terms in which this relation has been described. But what precisely is the content and nature of this appropriation? A certain confusion is produced by an assumption implicitly shared by the vast majority of scholars, the conviction that Heidegger’s philosophy constitutes a unique corpus and that his thought evolves linearly and uniformly. Τhe paper attempts to challenge this assumption. (shrink)

Against the traditional interpretation of Doxa as intrinsically and thoroughly deceiving and untrustworthy, the present essay examines the passages which follow the self-characterization of the goddess’ speech as ‘deceitful.’ The traits of an extensive cosmogony and cosmology open up the possibility for discerning two aspects of Doxa: first a presentation of mortal erroneous opinions, but then also their correction within the framework of the ‘appropriate world-arrangement’ presented by the goddess.

Truth has always been a controversial subject in Aristotelian scholarship. In most cases, including some well-known passages in the Categories, De Interpretatione and Metaphysics, Aristotle uses the predicate ‘true’ for assertions, although exceptions are many and impossible to ignore. One of the most complicated cases is the concept of practical truth in the sixth book of Nicomachean Ethics: its entanglement with action and desire raises doubts about the possibility of its inclusion to the propositional model of truth. Nevertheless, in one (...) of the most extensive studies on the subject, C. Olfert has tried to show that this is not only possible but also necessary. In this paper, we explain why trying to fit practical truth into the propositional model comes with insurmount­able problems. In order to overcome these problems, we focus on multiple aspects of practical syllogism and correlate them with Aristo­tle’s account of desire, happiness and the good. Identifying the role of such concepts in the specific steps of practical reasoning, we reach the conclusion that practical truth is best explained as the culmination of a well-executed practical syllogism taken as a whole, which ultimately explains why this type of syllogism demands a different approach and a different kind of truth than the theoretical one. (shrink)

Socrates’ autobiography in Phaedo signifies an attempt to incorporate earlier philosophical thinking in a progressive evolution culminating in the Platonic theory of Forms. In the “second sailing”, the “hypothesis of Forms” is not a hypothetical assumption, an arbitrary claim or conjecture, but something to be “sup-posed” prior to any further knowledge or statement. The careful reading and reconstruction of the famous simile of the “sun in eclipse” leads to crucial consequences concerning the attempt to “take refuge in the logoi”. The (...) Forms “sup-posed” in the logoi do not indicate a new “transcendent” object, but aim at the same target as that of the senses: at the truth of beings of our world. The “second sailing” follows a different route, but has the same direction as the “first sailing” of the physiologoi. (shrink)

Unter den philosophischen Strömungen des 20. Jh.s zeichnen sich die Existenzphilosophie und die Hermeneutik dadurch aus, dass sie sich nicht nur vielfach mit Aristoteles auseinandersetzten, sondern sich gerade durch diese Auseinandersetzung zu allererst entwickelten und ausgestalteten. Beide Disziplinen verbindet nicht nur das Lehrer-Schüler Verhältnis ihrer Hauptvertreter Martin Heidegger und Hans-Georg Gadamer, sondern auch eine sachliche Affinität – die aber in ihren Details strittig bleibt. Ebenso kontrovers sind Inhalt, Charakter und Intention der jeweiligen Bezugnahme der beiden Philosophen auf Aristoteles; generell konzentriert (...) sich dieser Bezug auf den Aristotelischen Begriff der Praxis, auf die dianoetische Tugend der Phronesis und auf den Aufweis der Spannungen, die zwischen den Facetten praktischer Rationalität im Aristotelischen Werk entstehen. (shrink)

When Gadamer elaborates his conception of philosophical hermeneutics as a transcendental inquiry, he appeals to Aristotle’s practical philosophy as a “model”, which can elucidate his own conceptualization of understanding as intrinsically bound to the specific circumstances of every interpretation. The explicit formulation of the analogy between Aristotelian ethics and philosophical hermeneutics provides a framework that clarifies Gadamer’s principal intention; it also reveals some of the crucial tensions inherent in the Aristotelian conception of practical philosophy and its relation to praxis and (...) phronêsis. In the 1970s, however, Gadamer suggests a practical transformation of hermeneutics, claiming for it the role of an “heir of the older tradition of practical philosophy”. Against Gadamer’s late “turn”, construed as a deviation from the initial analogy, I defend Aristotle’s practical philosophy as an exemplary model for philosophical hermeneutics, but I also maintain that the two projects pursue distinct epistemic goals. (shrink)

“To him who looks at the world rationally, the world looks rational in return. The relation is mutual.” This emblematic sentence illustrates Hegel's philosophy of history as a hermeneutics of history which, opposed to the apriorism explicitly rejected, searches for its “empirical” verification in trying to “accurately apprehend” history. The much-celebrated “end of history” is not so much an empirical assertion about historical reality as a methodological requirement for an interpretative strategy founded upon the logical category of “true” or “genuine (...) infinity”. (shrink)

Le manuscrit de Hegel découvert en 1917 et connu comme « le plus ancien programme systématique de l'idéalisme allemand » est considéré comme un texte emblématique pour le processus de genèse de l’idéalisme allemand. Bien qu’il adopte la langue de Kant et la « révolution copernicienne » que ce dernier avait apportée en fondant la philosophie sur le sujet pensant, ce texte formule des questions qui avaient été laissées sans réponse par le kantisme, en demandant qu’elles soient reposées dans le (...) cadre d’un nouveau fondement, systématique, de la philosophie. Le système que trace Hegel culmine avec l’idée suprême, l’idée du Beau, dans laquelle « la Vérité et la Bonté s’allient ». Le sens esthétique est érigé en « instrument » philosophique fondamental, indispensable à l’acte esthétique « suprême » par lequel la Raison conçoit et « englobe toutes les idées ». L’élément esthétique est également nécessaire à la nouvelle Volksreligion proclamée par le projet utopique hégélien. Enfin, en dépit des références kantiennes indubitables, l’ambition profonde du texte reste le dépassement d’un questionnement transcendantal orienté vers la conscience et son remplacement par un désir d’origine romantique de dépassement de toute dichotomie et d’atteindre l’union avec l’absolu. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Rhizomata Jahrgang: 5 Heft: 2 Seiten: 113-147.

Wonder is undoubtedly a term that floats around in today’s academic discussion both on ancient philosophy and on philosophy of education. Back in the 4th century B.C., Aristotle underlined the fact that philosophy begins in wonder, without being very specific about the conditions and the effects of its emergence. He focused a great deal on children’s education, emphasizing its fundamental role in human beings’ moral fulfillment, though he never provided a systematic account of children’s moral status. The aim of this (...) paper is to examine, on the one hand, if, to what extent, and under what conditions, Aristotle allows for philosophical wonder to emerge in children’s souls, and, on the other hand, how his approach to education may shed light to the link between wonder and the ultimate moral end, i.e. human flourishing. We will, thus, 1) try to offer a unified outlook of the philosopher’s views on children’s special cognitive and moral state, and 2) illustrate how wonder contributes in overcoming their imperfect state of being. (shrink)

Review of Panagiotis Thanassas, Parmenides, Cosmos, and Being: A Philosophical Interpretation, Marquette University Press, Milwaukee, 2007.