List of Articles Aristotle

• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  1 - Ammonius Hermiae and the Historical Impact of his Thought
  Maryam  Salem
  Neo-Platonic philosophers, in addition to advocating Plato’s philosophical and theological school and commenting on his works, also paid attention to Aristotle and explored his philosophy and theology alongside his logic and ethics. This gave rise to the development of More

  Neo-Platonic philosophers, in addition to advocating Plato’s philosophical and theological school and commenting on his works, also paid attention to Aristotle and explored his philosophy and theology alongside his logic and ethics. This gave rise to the development of a tradition among some of them to try to reconcile the ideas of these two philosophers with each other and demonstrate that there is no internal and external inconsistency between them. One of the prominent philosophers involved in this practice was Ammonius, the son of Hermiae, who, in spite of his anonymity during his own time, managed to exercise a great influence over the philosophical schools which emerged after him. This influence is quite noticeable initially on Islamic philosophers, particularly on Farabi, and then on Christian theologians. This paper aims to briefly introduce his character and some of his ideas. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  2 - Nature in the Views of Greek and Muslim Philosophers
  داود محمدیانی
  20.1001.1.20089589.1400.12.2.7.5
  Undoubtedly, nature has always attracted the attention of scientists and philosophers as the loci of the genesis and growth of natural existents and its current. Scientists working in the field of empirical sciences mainly seek the knowledge of natural existents and law More

  Undoubtedly, nature has always attracted the attention of scientists and philosophers as the loci of the genesis and growth of natural existents and its current. Scientists working in the field of empirical sciences mainly seek the knowledge of natural existents and laws of nature, while philosophers basically deal with the knowledge of nature itself and its structure and try to provide an answer to the questions of what the meaning of nature is, what its structure is, what relationship exists between existents and nature, whether nature is the primary source of the appearance of existents in the world, and whether nature, as matter and form, is a cradle for the appearance of various forms of existents. Greek philosophers and, later, Muslim philosophers have provided various responses to these questions. In ancient Greek philosophy, physis or nature means growth, living, and life. This meaning, which had provided the basis for pre-Socratic philosophy, changed into the “content of the world” and “maker of things” in Stoic philosophy. Plato also defined physis as the origin of the appearance of all things. He used the words technē (art) and archē (origin) to explain the emergence of the world and considered the creation of the world as an artistic innovation. Aristotle, who viewed the world synonymous with the whole nature, believed that nature is the source of motion and change in things; however, Muslim thinkers have provided various ideas about nature. Ikhwān al-Ṣafā maintained that nature is the fifth level of the levels of being and the “active” aspect of the world, with matter as its passive aspect. Ibn Sīnā considered nature and the interactions therein as God’s act and believed that nature is the cause of the appearance of corporeal substance by synthesizing matter and form. Unlike the Peripatetics, who believed that archetypes are the same as the nature of things, Suhrawardī rejected archetypes and replaced them with luminary nature. Finally, Mullā Ṣadrā viewed the world of nature identical with renewal and change and maintained that the nature of substance enjoys permanent motion and flow. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  3 - Resolving Zeno’s Paradoxes Based on the Theory of the “Linear Analytic Summation” and Evaluation of Evolution of Responsesa
  Reza Shakeri Ali Abedi Shahroodi
  20.1001.1.20089589.1401.12.4.5.1
  Zeno challenged the problem of motion following his master Parmenides and presented his criticisms of the theory of motion based on four arguments that in fact introduced the paradoxes of this theory. These paradoxes, which contradict an evident problem (motion), provok More

  Zeno challenged the problem of motion following his master Parmenides and presented his criticisms of the theory of motion based on four arguments that in fact introduced the paradoxes of this theory. These paradoxes, which contradict an evident problem (motion), provoked some reactions. This paper initially refers to two of Zeno’s paradoxes and then presents the responses provided by some thinkers of different periods. In his response to Zeno’s paradoxes, Aristotle separated the actual and potential runs of motion and, following a mathematical approach, resorted to the concept of infinitely small sizes. Kant has also referred to this problem in his antinomies. Secondly, the authors explain the theory of linear analytic summation, which consists of two elements: 1) The distance between two points of transfer can be divided infinitely; however, the absolute value of the subsequent distance is always smaller than the absolute value of the previous distance; 2) since the infinitude of the division is of an analytic rather than a synthetic nature, the summation limit of these distances will be equal to the initial distance. Based on this theory, as motion is not free of direction and continuous limits, an integral limit of distance is traversed at each moment, and the analytic, successive, and infinite limits of distance are determined. The final section of this paper is intended to evaluate the responses given to the paradoxes. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  4 - Philanthropia in Ancient Greece and its Relationship with Paideia
  Majid Mollayousefi Maryam Samadieh
  20.1001.1.20089589.1401.13.1.1.4
  The present paper investigates the relationship between philanthropia and paideia based on the texts of classical Greece. The term “philanthropia” was first used in a play called Prometheus Bound by Aeschylus and was later used repeatedly in some of the literary and phi More

  The present paper investigates the relationship between philanthropia and paideia based on the texts of classical Greece. The term “philanthropia” was first used in a play called Prometheus Bound by Aeschylus and was later used repeatedly in some of the literary and philosophical works of the Classical Greece. In this play, philanthropy has been attributed to Prometheus because he stole fire from Zeus to give it to human beings and save them from destruction. In the comedy Peace by Aristophanes, the god Hermes has been introduced as philanthropist because he makes it possible for the humankind to access peace. In Isocrates’ speech, the term philanthropist is applied to political leaders and people who posses the highest level of virtues and share such gifts as knowledge with others. Moreover, in the fourth book of Laws, Plato introduces Cronos a philanthropist because, during his reign, he tried to consolidate the pillars of culture and civilization in society. In the dialogue Euthyphro, Socrates considers himself to be a philanthropist because he shares his knowledge with others. As attested by Aristotle, philanthropia is an essential and intrinsic quality; however, it develops a knowledge-based form through paideia. On the other hand, those existents who are called philanthropists try to develop paideia and spread it in their society. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  5 - A Comparative Analysis of the Relationship between Tyche or Chance and Techne in Aristotle and Plutarch
  Maryam Samadieh
  20.1001.1.20089589.1401.13.3.2.9
  Aristotle holds a dual approach to the relationship between techne and tyche (chance). On the one hand, he uses the two terms in the same meaning with the same subject in his Nichomacean Ethics, and in Rhetoric introduces chance as the cause of attaining a limited numbe More

  Aristotle holds a dual approach to the relationship between techne and tyche (chance). On the one hand, he uses the two terms in the same meaning with the same subject in his Nichomacean Ethics, and in Rhetoric introduces chance as the cause of attaining a limited number of good things through techne. On the other hand, he connects techne and experience with chance and lack of experience and introduces techne and chance as two opposing concepts. This is because he believes that experience creates techne, and lack of experience exposes Man to chance and accident. A study of Aristotle’s thoughts reveals the reality that techne cannot originate in chance because it demands the knowledge of cause, while chance or luck is an accidental, indeterminate, and unstable cause. Moreover, a study of the relation of techne to aletheia or unconcealedness and disclosure indicates that techne cannot emerge from chance. The reason is that, in Aristotle’s view, techne is a rational virtue that results in revealing the truth, which is itself the result of artists’ knowledge and awareness of the outcome of their craft. Similar to Aristotle, Plutarch accepts chance as a cause; however, he maintains that the existence of techne renders chance meaningless. He believes that techne is rooted in human wisdom and cannot arise from chance. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  6 - The Relationship Between Finitude and Pure Theory in Heidegger’s Reading of Aristotle
  Mehrdad Ahmadi Mohamadreza Asadi
  20.1001.1.20089589.1401.13.3.3.0
  In Aristotle’s view, theoretical activity is an emotion-free and worldless activity that leaves all negative and resisting affairs behind. As a result, because of the falsity of finitude, error has no way into theoretical activity. Accordingly, theory enjoys a specific More

  In Aristotle’s view, theoretical activity is an emotion-free and worldless activity that leaves all negative and resisting affairs behind. As a result, because of the falsity of finitude, error has no way into theoretical activity. Accordingly, theory enjoys a specific kind of autonomy, in other words, an individual involved in pure theorizing perceives that in the course of theoretical activity he is immune to not only any emotion but also to any error in his purely theoretical activities. However, the essential point here is that in Heidegger’s view, Aristotle could never provide such a status for Man at the level of theory without undergoing a change in his understanding of existence and moving to the realm of poiesis. According to Heidegger, the horizon of ousiology of existence is the result of a transformation in the Greeks’ understanding of existence. As a result, the structural finitude of the emergence of existence and the finite position of the theoretician among existents enable him the develop an absolute knowledge of at least one existent, that is, theos or existing God. Therefore, the present paper aims to demonstrate how, based on Aristotle’s ousiology, knowledge in the sense of theorizing has turned into a deserving desire for all human beings and has emerged as a possibility for transcending the essential finitude of theory. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  7 - Platonic and Aristotelean Roots of the Concept of Time in Islamic Philosophy
  Seyed Mohammad  Moosavi Baygi Mohammad Amin  Afzalzadeh
  20.1001.1.20089589.1402.13.4.3.6
  Time is one of the most important features of the world of matter, and the knowledge of which has always attracted the attention of philosophers. The simplicity of perception of time and the difficulty of its explanation have resulted in some disagreements among philoso More

  Time is one of the most important features of the world of matter, and the knowledge of which has always attracted the attention of philosophers. The simplicity of perception of time and the difficulty of its explanation have resulted in some disagreements among philosophers concerning its definition. Islamic philosophers are no exception in this regard, and the roots of their disagreements go back to Plato’s and Aristotle’s different definitions of time. Plato defined time as a self-subsistent and essentially independent substance that is a differentiated form of the world of Ideas. In Aristotle’s view, time represents the number of motion from its priority and posteriority aspects, which cannot be gathered with each other. While acknowledging the difference between these two definitions, Islamic philosophers have usually chosen one of these definitions and tried to respond to the suspicions about their selected definition and reject the arguments in favor of the opposing one. Some philosophers such as Ibn Rushd, Ibn Sīnā, and Suhrawardī adopted Aristotle’s definition, while Zakarīyyā Rāzī and Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī advocated Plato’s definition. Nevertheless, no effort as to demonstrating the contrast between Aristotelean and Platonic definitions of time is justified because both philosophers believe that although time is different from motion, their existences are inseparable from each other. In other words, the perception of one depends on the perception of the other. accordingly, the present paper, while clarifying Plato’s view, initially intends to explain that it is not in contrast to Aristotle’s view and, secondly, aims to demonstrate the effects of their view on those of Muslim philosophers. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  8 - A Study of the Historical Development of the Notion of Platonic-Aristotelean Agape and Love in Fārābī and Ṭūsī (In the Realm of Human Relationships)
  Fereshteh Abolhassani Niaraki
  20.1001.1.20089589.1402.13.4.4.7
  The present study provides a description and analysis of the historical development of the notion of Aristotelean-Platonic agape (love) in the philosophical thoughts of Fārābī and Khwājah Nasīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī. Following a historical method, the author deals with the reason More

  The present study provides a description and analysis of the historical development of the notion of Aristotelean-Platonic agape (love) in the philosophical thoughts of Fārābī and Khwājah Nasīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī. Following a historical method, the author deals with the reasons behind this development in addition to describing it. The discussion of friendship (agape) in Aristotle’s philosophy is propounded in his Nichomachean Ethics, where some traces of Platonic notion are also observable. This discussion was transformed in Islamic Philosophy in certain respects, including the variety of the beloved (and the most beloved), individualistic or socialist aspect, and selfishness or selflessness aspect. Regarding the variety of the beloved, the discussion has moved from virtue-based friendship (agape) to the love of the Wise (God). As to its range, one can observe a change of dialog form social-political friendship to agape as an internal characteristic with individual and social effects. Moreover, it has moved beyond selfishness and selflessness and, in conformity with the principle of congruence, reached the love from Him (Godly). The influential views of such thinkers as Plotinus; the role of religion, culture, and gnosis, and the ideas of Ibn Sīnā, Ibn Miskawayh, and Suhrawardī are of great importance in explaining this development. The particular philosophical and Kalāmī principles of Fārābī and Ṭūsī as well as some of their ethical views are the most important factors in the interpretation of the underlying reasons of the mentioned development. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  9 - An Evaluation of Martha Nussbaum’s View of the Non-Relativity of Virtues in Aristotelian Approach
  Mohammad Saeid  Abdollahi Mohamad Ali  Abdollahi
  20.1001.1.20089589.1401.13.3.7.4
  The nature, role, and quality of attaining virtue hold an important place in Aristotle’s philosophy. He tried to provide a systematic account of Man’s goal of achieving virtue. Martha Nussbaum, the contemporary commentator of Aristotle, believes that some contemporary p More

  The nature, role, and quality of attaining virtue hold an important place in Aristotle’s philosophy. He tried to provide a systematic account of Man’s goal of achieving virtue. Martha Nussbaum, the contemporary commentator of Aristotle, believes that some contemporary philosophers, although considering themselves as advocates of Aristotle, have some disagreements with him regarding certain key issues. Their mistake is rooted in their relativist approach to Aristotelian virtues. This approach stands in clear opposition to other views of Aristotle, who defended a single objective description of goodness or happiness for Man. Aristotle’s ethical virtue can explain many of the problems that relativists tried to solve and, at the same time, claim to be objective in the sense that relativism in one specific context does not mean being a relativist. For example, in other sciences, such as medicine and maritime, attention is devoted to particular cases, but it does not mean that the scholars and scientists in these fields are relativist. According to Nussbaum, Aristotelian virtues can explain virtue better than the virtues intended by relativists. However, this is the case when the specific features of a context are meticulously examined, and both shared and unshared characteristics are taken into consideration so that the best choice is made. In this paper, after explaining Nussbaum’s view concerning Aristotelian virtues, the author investigates three objections to his theory and, finally, clarifies the non-relativity of virtues in Aristotle’s thoughts. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  10 - Role of Moral Character in Responsibility in Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas
  Rahim Nobahar Mansooreh Ghanbarian Banooee
  20.1001.1.20089589.1402.14.1.2.2
  Aristotle’s theory of moral responsibility, as a pioneer theory of ethics of virtue, presents a new approach to responsibility because of its particular attention to moral conduct. Aquinas, a follower of Aristotle, has provided a new interpretation of moral responsibili More

  Aristotle’s theory of moral responsibility, as a pioneer theory of ethics of virtue, presents a new approach to responsibility because of its particular attention to moral conduct. Aquinas, a follower of Aristotle, has provided a new interpretation of moral responsibility with an emphasis on character and a focus on completely voluntary human acts and the role of apriori reflection on act. In the views of these two philosophers, moral agent is an agent who possesses knowledge, personality vice, and the ability to perform completely voluntary acts. Accordingly, children and animals are never subjected to moral evaluations because they lack such moral capacities and characters. Aristotle and Aquinas believe that the realm of moral agents, in addition to evil and virtuous people, includes restrained and non-restrained ones. Following a descriptive-analytic method, the present paper investigates the conditions under which the acts of moral agents are subjected to ethical evaluations in the views of Aristotle and Aquinas. Based on the findings of this study, those acts that become the subjects of moral responsibility must be done voluntarily based on the moral character of the agent as a non-accidental stimulus for act, even if they do not originate in deliberation and are not based on prior decision making. This is because sudden acts also originate in certain sources and function as clear references for moral evaluations. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  11 - Aristotelean Roots of the Soul’s Corporeal Origination in Mullā Ṣadrā’s View
  Hamideh  Ansari Hassan Fathi Morteza  Shajari
  20.1001.1.20089589.1402.14.1.7.7
  Philosophers have presented different views about the whatness and truth of the soul based on dualism (immateriality of the soul based on the pre-eternity and origination of the soul before the existence of the body or along with it) or monism (corporeal origination of More

  Philosophers have presented different views about the whatness and truth of the soul based on dualism (immateriality of the soul based on the pre-eternity and origination of the soul before the existence of the body or along with it) or monism (corporeal origination of the soul). Mullā Ṣadrā believes that the soul is corporeally originated. The principles of the Transcendent Philosophy, including the trans-substantial motion, the principiality and gradedness of being, and the corporeal origination of the soul, have made it possible to demonstrate corporeal resurrection. Aristotle also believes that the origination of the soul is corporeal. However, the extent to which Mullā Ṣadrā is influenced by Aristotle’s ideas in this regard has never been studied so far. This paper is intended to explain the Aristotelean roots of Mullā Ṣadrā’s discussion of corporeal origination following a comparative-analytic method. The findings of this study indicate that in defining the soul as a “natural and organic body” and, following it, considering the soul as a formal substance and a primary perfection of the body, as well as believing in the unitary synthesis of the body and the soul and the unity of the faculties of the soul, all indicating the corporeal origination of the soul, Mullā Ṣadrā is under the influence of Aristotle. Nevertheless, Aristotle’s approach suffers from some ambiguity because of the existing implicitness in some of his words and not referring to an explicit standpoint regarding the principiality of existence or quiddity, presence of motion in substance, and gradedness of existence. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  12 - Analysis of Proclus' reading of Aristotle's psychology based on the treatise on soul and theologia
  Hajar Nili Ahmadabadi Hossein Kalbasi Ashtar
  20.1001.1.20089589.1402.14.3.6.0
  Awareness of the soul and its definition has had a special position and has. This position is somehow reflected in experimental sciences. Aristotle and Proclus, two representatives of the greatest and most influential ancient philosophical schools, namely the philosophy More

  Awareness of the soul and its definition has had a special position and has. This position is somehow reflected in experimental sciences. Aristotle and Proclus, two representatives of the greatest and most influential ancient philosophical schools, namely the philosophy of Masha and the Neoplatonic school, have paid special attention to this field and have dedicated a part of their main writings to this topic. The present article, focusing on the two main sources of the psychology among these two philosophers, aims to identify the points of commonality and difference in their views and to study the evolution and development of the subject, the definition, and what the soul is. While expressing two natural and metaphysical definitions, Aristotle considers the soul to be related to the body in the natural definition. He considers it independent of the body in the metaphysical definition and calls the soul the principle of life of a living being. By expressing natural and metaphysical definitions and a description of the soul, Proclus pursues a path close to Aristotle in his natural and metaphysical definition; But in the descriptive definition, he chooses a different path from Aristotle. He considers the truth of the soul to be self-made, self-animated, self-formed, and self-realized, and he believes that the soul is the principle of life, the cause of bodies, the reason for the existence of objects and their preservation, and in other words, the creator of their uniqueness and continuity. Manuscript profile