The limits of gnoseologic paradigm, from Aristotle to Locke. The effort here has its basis in the need to overcome limits of interpretation, tabulations and classifications that often accompany analyses on classic empirism, in general and his Locke, in particular. We try to find aut in Greek philosophy the germs of moderat empirism. And if Aristotel is undeniable, such a possible start, will wonder, perhaps, Plato's thought.

This paper bases on a (great!) wrongful act which was made to Greek philosophy, and especially to the pre-Socratic one: the unilateral abatement of thestudies to those of cosmological nature. The big mutation would take place in Socrates’ time, who by the anthropology of the discourse takes philosophy to a theory of knowledge, through a program which would be perfected by Plato and especially by Aristotle. This is a point of view co-substantial to history of philosophy, which some times risks (...) to charge in an alethic (good/bad) way a paradigm based on false discussions. Pre-Socratics were not only preoccupied by ontology, or even cosmology, as well as Aristotle was not a radical empirist. In the economy of thought the nuances are more important than a classification often made for our epistemological comfort. (shrink)