Cover of Chôra
Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Displaying: 41-60 of 378 documents


études
41. Chôra: Volume > 17
Marguerite Deslauriers Le plaisir et le temps dans le livre X de l’Éthique a Nicomaque
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Aristotle begins the discussion of pleasure in Book X of the Nicomachean Ethics with the claim that pleasure “is thought to be most properly connected with our kind,” (EN X 1, 1172a19‑23). In his positive account of pleasure in X 4, he suggests that we can somehow experience pleasure otherwise than “in time” (1174b2‑10). The aim of this article is to show how the claim that pleasure does not occur ‘in time’ might illuminate the claim that pleasure is most properly connected to our kind. The point, I will argue, is not only that pleasure is complete at every moment – that will be true of many activities – but also that pleasure has the same structure as the best activity available to us, and a structure different from the best activity available to other kinds. Several passages indicate that Aristotle believes that all living things act for the sake of immortality, understood as divine and eternal life, and connect the pursuit of eternal life with the activities that are natural to a species. These offer us a way to understand why the pleasure of contemplation is the best pleasure, and why pleasure is most intimately connected with our kind. I begin in section (ii) with an exploration of the pleasures proper to different activities which are in turn proper to different kinds. In subsequent sections (iii) I take a closer look at contemplation, particularly insofar as it is an activity that does not take place ‘in time’ but rather ‘in a moment’, and consider Aristotle’s reasons for describing such activities as wholes, or indivisible, or without parts ; and (iv) I turn to the relation between the activities and pleasures proper to different kinds and the possibilities available to those different kinds for approximating divine life. In the final section (v) I return to question of pleasure and its intimate connection with our kind.
42. Chôra: Volume > 17
Annick Jaulin Aristote : le plaisir des differences
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Given the necessary connection between pleasure and energeia, the value of an aristotelian pleasure depends on the value of its correlative activity. Since the absolute pleasures the philokalos takes in his virtuous activities might go hand in hand with pains, the definition of absolute pleasure cannot rely on the distinction between mixed pleasure (pleasure with pain) versus pure pleasure (pleasure without pain). So, how can we characterize the pleasures of the temperate man (sophron) ? My thesis is that the right way to define the pleasures of the temperate man is to describe them as pleasures derived from differences. A pleasure derived from differences is involved in the pleasure human beings get from the formal use of their senses. It then belongs to the kind of pleasure they take in knowing. This formal use of the senses helps understanding how the pleasures of the temperate man can be separated from the pleasures enjoyed by children and animals.
43. Chôra: Volume > 17
Pierre Pellegrin Le plaisir animal selon Aristote
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In an evolutionist theory like that of Darwin, animal pleasure has a properly vital function in directing animals toward pleasant behaviors which also happen to be advantageous. The best example of this is probably sexual pleasure which contributes to the survival of species. Aristotelian fixism does not need such an analysis since Nature has provided living beings with an innate tendency to reproduce and pleasure cannot have an adaptative function, because adaptation is given to animals once and for all and cannot improve. The idea that pleasure induces an animal to adopt some useful behavior by trials and errors is unacceptable to Aristotle. Animals, on the other hand, being deprived of the perception of the good and the beautiful because they do not partake in reason, do not get pleasure from things in the world but in a coincidental way : the odor of the hare is pleasant to the dog because it is associated, in the dog’s perception, to the fact that dogs do eat hares. Far from being pleasant by itself, the odor of the hare is not attractive at all for a fed up dog. It remains for pleasure to be the sign of the good functioning of the organism, that is an hymn to the perfection of Nature.
44. Chôra: Volume > 17
William Marx Catharsis et plaisir tragique selon Aristote
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Catharsis and tragic pleasure according to Aristotle. According to Aristotle, tragedies induce three different kinds of pleasures. First, there is the cognitive pleasure of imitation, since it is pleasurable to recognize in the imitation an object one already knows. Second, there is the aesthetic pleasure linked to the material parameters of the tragedy, that is the language, the show, and the performance (verses, singing, acting). Third, there is the “specific” pleasure of tragedy. This specific pleasure is linked to the affects of pity and fear through the process of catharsis. Although pity and fear are two opposite affects depending on the position of the subject relatively to an event, the spectator of the tragedy is bound to experience both of them simultaneously because of the ethical similarity the playwright must keep between him and the tragic hero. But pity and fear are also two opposite affects on the physiological level : pity is a warm affect, fear a cold one. Catharsis is then a physiological balancing of pity by fear, of warmth by cold, and reciprocally, and this continuous suppression of excesses of temperature through the tragic imitation, while bringing a feeling of relief and pleasure, rids the spectator of all excessive affects. Catharsis provides a healthy and hygienic pleasure, and so can Aristotle effectively reply to Plato’s criticism of tragedy.
45. Chôra: Volume > 17
Gweltaz Guyomarc’h Plaisir et acte selon Alexandre d’Aphrodise
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
According to some testimonies, the Aristotelian ethics have been torn between a hedonist reading, as much as an anti‑hedonist one, throughout Antiquity. From Critolaos to Verginius Rufus and Sosicrates, pleasure is considered both as “an evil [that] gives birth to many other evils” and as the first appropriate thing and the supreme good. This noteworthy disagreement stems from a famous difficulty within the Aristotelian corpus, raised by Aspasius, i.e. the alleged coexistence of two ‘definitions’ of pleasure in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics VII and X. In this paper, I offer a reconstruction of Alexander’s treatment of this difficulty, based on some passages from Alexander’s Ethical Problems and the Mantissa. I try to show that Alexander does not dismiss the so‑called “definition A” of pleasure (the unimpeded activity of one’s natural state) as being spurious, although he obviously values more the definition B (according to which pleasure perfects the activity as a kind of supervenient end). Even if he never openly brands the definition A as “dialectic” (like Aspasius), Alexander takes it as a reputable endoxon, which however needs to be emended in that it blurs the distinction between pleasure and activity. Pleasure only supervenes on the activity to which it is appropriate, and this supervenience is precisely what accounts for the inaccuracy of the definition A. As much as the child conflates the apparent good and the good, so the hedonist takes pleasure to be identical with the activity and the telos of human life. On the contrary, for Alexander, pleasure is actually only a sign of happiness and the shadow of the activity.
46. Chôra: Volume > 17
Iacopo Costa Le statut ontologique du plaisir: exegese aristotelicienne et querelles theologiques (1250·1320 env.)
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The aim of this paper is to study some aspects of the Medieval Latin reception of Aristotle’s theory of pleasure (Eth. Nic. X). First, I introduce Aristotle’s position, with special attention to the problem of the ontological status of pleasure and the relationship between pleasure and the different genera of causes (viz. formal and final causality), as well as the somehow ambiguous exegesis of Michael of Ephesus. Second, I take into account the interpretation given by Albert the Great in his first commentary on the Ethics. Finally, I present some theological issues raised by Albert’s interpretation, in the discussions about beatific vision. The authors taken in account are James of Viterbo, Radulphus Brito, Peter Auriol and William of Ockham.
varia
47. Chôra: Volume > 17
Louise Rodrigue L’ideal ethique selon d’Aristote, ou la ≪belle vie≫
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This study aims at providing a global explanation of the good life or happiness according to Aristotle. By applying the method used in ethics by Aristotle, the specific content of happiness is determined, of which meditation is the essence, together with the practice of moral virtues. The article rests on a relatively new perspective, neither ‘exclusive’ nor ‘inclusive’, considering the results of each type of traditional interpretation, and shedding light upon the richness of all happiness’ dimensions.
48. Chôra: Volume > 17
Xavier Gheerbrant Interpreter l’Elegie parenetique archaique: A propos de l’ouvrage de Magali Annee sur Tyrtee et Kallinos
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The book by Magali Année, Tyrtee et Kallinos (Paris, 2017), claims to establish new and ambitious grounds on which to found an interpretation of Tyrtaeus’ and Kallinos’ works. By analysing the underlining networks of phonic‑syllabic repetitions in the available fragments, she studies how those two poets have elaborated a paroenetic‑incantatory diction to make the audience accept the content of the exhortation as an already‑lived experience. For instance, she argues that any item in the phonic sequence ‑μεν/μην/μον/μν‑, even as a palindrome, refers to the action denoted by the verb μένειν, “to resist”. Année elaborates the conditions for the plausibility of her original interpretation through a re‑evaluation of the frameworks through which archaic poems are usually interpreted, and she proposes a new edition of the testimonies and fragments on the ground of radical textual conservatism. After summarising the author’s arguments in detail, I conclude that, in spite of their merits, they fail to meet the author’s objectives completely. I discuss in turn : how the author arranges the new edition of the testimonies and fragments ; how she argues for her central view about phonic‑syllabic repetitions and the elaboration of the secondary layer of meaning ; and how she analyses meter, which she presents as one of the bases for phonic‑pragmatic constructs ; and how she conceives of her hermeneutical approach. On this last point, I specifically address the author’s view on the relationship between testimonies and fragments, the type of meaning she focuses on, the deconstruction of pre‑interpretations, and textual conservatism. I argue that the Année’s proposed underlying network of meaning comes at the expense of “meaning” in the more usual sense ; we could however have expected her to elaborate on how her proposed layer of meaning enriches or enhances our understanding of the more usual layer. Tyrtee et Kallinos therefore represents an alternative to traditional interpretative approaches, with limits of its own, rather than a re‑founding.
codicologica
49. Chôra: Volume > 17
Adinel Dincă A manuscript fragment of Vincent de Beauvais’ Speculum historiale in Romania (Sibiu, National Archives, U. V. 1926)
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Die Identifizierung eines fragmentarisch erhaltenen Textes aus dem Speculum Historiale, das von Vincent de Beauvais um die Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts zusammengestellt wurde – eine im Mittelalter überall sehr geschätzte historiographische Arbeit – könnte eine Diskussion über den Wert der Geschichtsschreibung innerhalb der Lesepraxis im vormodernen Siebenbürgen anregen. In vorliegendem Aufsatz wird versucht, auf verschiedene Aspekte einzugehen, in erster Linie auf Fragen der Datierung und der Lokalisierung dieses Fragments. Es wird dann weiter argumentiert, dass die beiden noch vorhandenen Blätter ursprünglich Teil einer Handschrift waren, bislang die östlichste Rezeption des Textes in dieser Form darstellt ; die Handschrift war bereits um 1500 im Besitz eines Siebenbürgers.
comptes rendus
50. Chôra: Volume > 17
Andrei‑Tudor Man Neoplatonic Demons and Angels
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
51. Chôra: Volume > 17
Izabela Jurasz Formen und Nebenformen des Platonismus in der Spätantike; Hierarchie und Ritual. Zur philosophischen Spiritualität in der Spätantike
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
52. Chôra: Volume > 17
Izabela Jurasz Hymnes contre les hérésies. Hymnes contre Julien; Hymnes contre les hérésies
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
53. Chôra: Volume > 17
Alexandra Anisie L’essentialisme de Guillaume D’Ockham
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
54. Chôra: Volume > 17
Eleni Procopiou VIVRE EN EXISTANT. Une nouvelle Éthique
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
55. Chôra: Volume > 17
Auteurs
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
56. Chôra: Volume > 15/16
Anca Vasiliu Note liminaire: Quelques réflexions en guise d’introduction
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
études
57. Chôra: Volume > 15/16
Mario Vegetti To siôpoumenon agathon
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
La discussione sull’idea del buono (to agathon) occupa uno spazio marginale nel libro VI della Repubblica, ma comporta un eccezionale impegno teorico : di qui la vastita della letteratura esegetica che contrasta con la brevita del testo platonico. Il problema cruciale e questo : in Repubblica VI 504a‑509c to agathon non e piu solo un principio di valorizzazione e un criterio di valutazione di cose e condotte – com’e consueto in Platone – ma assume il ruolo di principio ontologico ed epistemologico. Questa posizione ha spesso suggerito interpretazioni di tipo “teologico” dell’idea del buono (identificata a volte con l’Uno neoplatonico, altre con il Demiurgo del Timeo). Quello che si puo affermare sulla base del testo, e che Platone ha conferito in queste pagine della Repubblica un primato al vertice etico del triangolo i cui altri vertici sono quello ontologico e quello epistemologico ; l’intento e quello di offrire una fondazione etica assoluta (antiprotagorea), mediante la connessione della sfera del valore con quelle dell’essere e della verita (quindi anche in ambito politico una giustificazione ultimativa al diritto dei filosofi a governare).L’unificazione delle dimensioni etica, ontologica ed epistemologica sarebbe parsa teoricamente insostenibile ad Aristotele, cui si deve una critica devastante alla teoria platonica del buono.
58. Chôra: Volume > 15/16
Rafael Ferber Le Bien de Platon et le problème de la transcendance du Principe. Encore une fois l’ἐπέκεινα τῆς οὐσίας de Platon
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The article again treats the question of whether ≪the Idea of the Good is a Reality in the Universe, or beyond it. Is it immanent or transcendent ?≫ (Rufus Jones, 1863‑1948). Plato scholars such as Matthias Baltes (1940‑2003) and Luc Brisson have defended the thesis that Plato’s Idea of the Good is, on the one hand, beyond being (epekeina tes ousias) in dignity and power, but, on the other, is nevertheless not transcendent over being. The article delivers first (I) the most important arguments for the thesis of Baltes and Brisson. Then (II), it gives two counterarguments against the thesis. Third (III), it concludes with some general questions concerning the deflationist interpretation of Plato’s Republic 509b9‑10, and defends again the transcendence of the Idea of the Good.
59. Chôra: Volume > 15/16
Suzanne Husson Autarcie du Bien et dépendance de l’être?: De la République au Sophiste
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Self‑sufficiency of the Good and dependency of Being ? From Republic to Sophist. Even thought Parmenides doesn’t use αὐτάρκης and any noun derived from this root, the Being is conceived by him as self‑sufficient (v. 8,33). Plato, for its part, never uses this term concerning the intelligible reality ; however, in the Sophist, he allusively challenges Parmenides self‑sufficiency of Being and outlines an ontology that is conflicting with it. On the other hand self‑sufficiency is explicitly ascribed by Plato to the human good (Philebus, 20d, 67a), to the divine world (Timaeus, 33d), and also to the virtuous man (Republic, 387d). This paper aims to demonstrate that these facets (theological or anthropological) of self‑sufficiency are consistent with the supremacy of the idea of the Good in the Republic, which can be understood as a structural kind of self‑sufficiency.
60. Chôra: Volume > 15/16
Franco Ferrari Platone ha effettivamente identificato il demiurgo del Timeo e l’idea del bene della Repubblica?: Riflessioni intorno a un’antica querelle filosofica
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Un debat tres vif eut lieu parmi les commentateurs medioplatoniciens sur le rapport entre la forme du bien de la Republique et le demiurge du Timee. Certains d’entre eux, comme Plutarque et Atticus, parvinrent a identifier ces deux entites, d’autres, comme Numenius, a situer les deux principes dans une relation hierarchique, en attribuant au bien la qualification de ≪premier dieu≫ et de pere (pater) et au demiurge celle de ≪second dieu≫ et de producteur (poietes). Cet article se propose d’examiner la question de l’identite de la forme du bien avec le demiurge sur des bases nouvelles, en prenant comme point de depart une interpretation metaphorique de la figure du demiurge, qui ne se presente pas comme un principe metaphysique independant, mais comme une description metaphorique de l’element causal‑efficient du monde des formes, c’est a dire du vivant intelligible. Le demiurge coinciderait donc avec la totalite active et dynamique du monde intelligible (panteles zoon). Dans la seconde partie de l’article est prise en consideration l’hypothese que la superiorite de la forme du bien par rapport aux autres formes est du meme genre que celle du demiurge, dans la mesure ou le bien aussi peut etre compris comme la totalite du kosmos intelligible. Il s’agit d’une hypothese qui ne va pas sans difficultes, mais qui merite d’etre examinee jusqu’au bout.