Product Description
"The Arabic Plotinus" was the most important source for Neoplatonic ideas in the Arabic world. Falsely attributed to Aristotle and known as the ‘Theology of Aristotle’, the Arabic version of Plotinus’ "Enneads" was influential on Muslim philosophers from al-Kindi to Avicenna and beyond. This book is a study of the philosophical transformation undergone by the works of Plotinus when they were rendered into Arabic as the ‘Theology’. The translator’s approach to Plotinus was creative and historically decisive: he tried to make Neoplatonism compatible with the religions of Christianity and Islam, and to assimilate Plotinus to the thought of the genuine Aristotle.

This is the first book-length study of the text, devoted to understanding the ideas and motivations of the translator who helped to determine how philosophers for centuries thereafter would confront Greek thought. ... Read more

Product Description
Winner of the Journal of the History of Ideas's Morris D. Forkosch prizeThis book traces the development thought about God and the relationship between God's being and activity from Aristotle, through the pagan Neoplatonists, to thinkers such as Augustine, Boethius, and Aquinas (in the West) and Dionysius the Areopagite, Maximus the Confessor, and Gregory Palamas (in the East). The resulst is a comparative history of philosophical thought in the two halves of Christendom, providing a philosophical backdrop to the schism between the Eastern and Western churches. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (7)

Aristotle and much more!
This wonderful book underrates itself in its modest title. Bradshaw virtually offers a deep and deeply interesting account of Christian philosophy in the first millennium, with a serious and helpful look at the consequences in later medieval thought. These include not only the schism, in which the West fell away from its spiritual unity with the central tradition of the Orthodox Faith, but also an impoverished understanding of the notions of power and energy. Though Philip Sherrard addressed some of these themes in his comparative works--still well worth consideration--, he did so far less accessibly than Bradshaw.

The Latin tradition is intelligently and even sympathetically discussed in a predominantly irenic spirit. Bradshaw manages to balance the prevailing atmosphere of Western ignorance and prejudice (well illustrated in a couple of the less sympathetic reviews here) with a lucid account of the thinking of important but underemphasized figures in philosophical scholarship; e.g., the Cappadocians, St. Dionysius and St. Maximus. While there have been a number of helpful studies of these thinkers in recent years, they have been mostly concerned with what is now called spirituality, or with dogmatic theology. The unity of faith, practice and intellectual life which has prevailed in the Christian East has not been generally appreciated. Bradshaw appreciates it.

I have shared this fine book with colleagues and students; they have always profited and appreciated its helpful treatment of an issue and of thinkers who are still far too little appreciated or ill understood in prevalent schools of philosophical scholarship. It is hard reading, but well worth the effort.

A Theology for a Real Growing Experience with God
This is an intellectually challenging work, but it is very clearly written and shows the way of the Fathers of the Church who walked with God constantly.Book knowledge is not enough, but this solid knowledge provides the way to walk in faith in the Living and True God.
The book deals with the concept of energy is all its historic nuonces, but then shows how the Apostle Paul and the great teachers who followed him in the East used the concept to help us grasp the Biblical experience of Our Lord Jesus and His doctrine of communion with the Holy Trinity.
It also shows how conceptual blocks in some of the Western Fathers created a divide between theology and practice.

Moderation in all things.Don't use this book to "prove" preconceived conclusions of Orthodoxy.
I would like to compliment Dr. Bradshaw for his hard work. My review will be, hopefully, an open-minded critique to give a scholar or theologian/philosopher some serious considerations.
1.) Dr. Bradshaw is a UT Austin Man. I imagine that he was in the Ancient Philosophy/Greek program. It is academically rigorous, speaking as a former UT Greek student. Dr. Bradshaw enlarged upon his doctoral thesis on Aristotle to venture into Christian theology, perhaps that's where he went wrong.
2.) The Institute for Orthodox Christian Studies hosted a public presentation of the book by doctor Bradshaw and provided a rebuttal by a well versed theologian. The Q&A was wonderful. See:http://www.snvteam.com/iocs/videos/index.php?page=play&groupid=0&movieid=1&q=lowHowever, for Dr. Bradshaw, I imagine he was humiliated by the whole thing.
3.) If you don't have time to watch the film, consider the following: The title of his book is theologically oriented. After Dr. Bradshaw was "hammered" in the discussion, his reply to several objections was a.) professing that he's not a theologian and so was ignorant of several important controversies and figures with regard to the very topics he was attempting to influence b.) He openly admitted that he had probably some major holes in not reading all pertinent authors c.) amazingly, he pronounced his ignorance about Duns Scotus. If you know this controversy well...this is inexcusable! The outstanding philosopher-theologian Gennadius Scholarios (Patriarch of Const. and appointed Successor of Mark Eugenicus/Ephesus) professed to have reconciled Palamas with Scotistic theology (brilliantly!). John Romanides ripped (see his website) poor Meyendorff for not understanding Scotus (among other Latins), not unlike Bradshaw. I was horrified that the good Doctor was "shocked" to see that there were parallels in Scotus' metaphysics and Gregory's. It was a bloodbath.
To select but one more point, our Good Doctor suggested a form of divine-human relation which explicitly meant that God should be determined in his actions by contingent human beings in relation to him. His opponent then reduced him to a pile of ash (for that and his errors on Aquinas).

Conclusions: 1.) Great study of Greek, and the use of terms in "the Philosopher" and in history and the Bible; a UT Austin strong point 2.) Weak on showing that post-Dionysian Phil/Theol was historically enslaved by a quasi-moral necessity to follow this PSEUDO-Denys, who although quite talented, is arguablely able to help us know anything about God, and was accepted perhaps more on his authority as an "apostle" than for his intrinsic merit. Furthermore, Denys' sources and dependence on pagan theology calls into question the contributions of Dionysian Christians, who are conscious, or unconscious, neo-Platonists.Thus, those who slavishly follow Denys are going to have big philosophical problems to resolve 3.) He admits that he is approaching theology (in his interview) as a "philosopher", ironically making a division (perhaps saving face after being humiliated) that would not have been admitted by many theologians of the scholastic period on both sides. In the East, if one tried to theologize as a "Philosopher", what would have happened to him (11th century synods condemned the "atheistic ratiocinations" of Hellenic philosophy in theology)? Real theologians are pretty easy to find in the Eastern tradition, to quote Evagrius Ponticus (On Prayer): "The theologian prayers truly, and he who prays truly is a theologian."
Dr., a noble effort, hard work, but a lot of holes and shortcomings. Perhaps it best to stay in in your field.
[...]

Starts out well, then crashes
There is indeed some impressive scholarship in this book, except where the author attempts to make sense of figures he has failed to study in depth, such as Aquinas, where the errors are numerous and elementary.Behind the project, of course, is an agenda, a familiar anti-Western polemic dressed up in good historical research and extremely clumsy philosophy.
I notice that the publishers quote David Burrell's review in Nova et Vetera--funny, since that review was anything but positive in its final conclusions regarding this book.
Bradshaw is a bad philosopher, but he gives his audience what they want.He will be praised extravagantly.

Revealed God or Philosophical Idol?
First, the negative review is pure B.S.

Dr. Bradshaw is not polemical and goes right to the primary texts (and I believe he does so in the original languages).Hence, his supposed "oversight" of the best western scholarship is nonsense, as Dr. Bradshaw's work IS the best western, secondary writing on his topic.No need to bow to the clouded and prejudiced views of those who have gone before.

Moving on:

Dr. Bradshaw's painstakingly documented and detailed demonstration and explication of the fundamental difference between the views about God held by the Christian East and West (since the ascendency of Augustinian theology) is a must read for all serious 'theologians,' Eastern and Western, Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox alike.

The first crucial point that Bradshaw argues, and which I believe he has demonstrated, is that Eastern Christianity used the language of the ancient Greek philosphy to go beyond the concepts and content of that philosophy to explain the new information about God offered by Christian revelation.More importantly, Bradshaw precisely demonstrates how Eastern Christianity employed Greek philosophical words and embued them with extended or new meaning to explain that God is personal and beyond conceptualization and, furthermore, that mankind can really participate in divine life without pantheistic absorption.Indeed, the notion that God as personal, not an idea, set of ideas, or an impersonal force of somekind -- and more, that man can partificate in divine life without pantheistic absorption -- was entirely alien to pre-Christian Hellenic thinking.

The second crucial point that Bradshaw argues, and I believe that he demonstrates, is that Augustinian theology not only used certain terminology of ancient Greek philosophy but also conflated the God of Christian revelation with certain concepts from the content of philosphy, thereby trapping God into a conceptual box, so to speak.Specifically, by limiting God to "being itself" in agreement with neoPlatonic philosophy (an apparently self-evident human logic) but contrary to the often mysterious traditions of authentic, apostolic Christian revelation, the Christian West developed an inauthentic systematic theology (both in neoPlatonic Augustianism and Aristolelian Thomism), which was based on a conceptual idol, not the unlimited God of revelation, and worse yet, an idol whose 'life' no man could ever participate in or share -- a God of intellectual contemplation of estatic beholding (an neat idea?; a beautiful picture?) but nothing more.

Finally, Bradshaw invites further scholarship and hard thinking about the possibility that western theology (or perhaps more appropriately western intellectual idolatry) created the fertile ground for the Enlightenment and all the disaster it birthed:the genocidal Twentieth Century.Of course, the fact that the Christian East experienced no Enlightenment and no Reformation is not proof that the idiocyncracies of western theology caused those events, but it does raise the question.And Bradshaw pinpoints the dubious aspects of western theology that best support the view that post-schism western Christianity has planted the seeds of its own destruction and perhaps of the world. ... Read more

Product Description
Uncovering Aristotle's motivations and basic views while paying careful attention to his arguments, this introduction to the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle's great masterpiece of moral philosophy, offers a thorough examination of the entire work. The chapter on friendship captures Aristotle's doctrine with clarity and insight, and Michael Pakaluk develops original and compelling interpretations of the Function Argument, the Doctrine of the Mean, courage and other character virtues, Akrasia, and the two treatments of pleasure. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

We Reach Our Complete Perfection Through Habit
I read this book for a graduate seminar on Aristotle.I think Aristotle's ethics is his most seminal work in philosophy.In the early 1960's virtue ethics came to fore.It is a retrieval of Aristotle.It has very close parallels to the ancient Chinese philosophy of Confucius and the modern philosophy espoused in the 1970's called Communitarianism.

For Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics, (EN) is about human life in an embodied state.Area of inquirery for EN is "good" this is his phenomenology.What does "good" mean?He suggests good means "a desired end."Something desirable.Means towards these ends.Such as money is good, so one can buy food to eat because "eating is good."In moral philosophy distinction between "intrinsic good" vs. "instrumental good."Instrumental good towards a desire is "instrumental good" like money.Thus, money is an "instrumental good" for another purpose because it produces something beyond itself.Instrumental good means because it further produces a good, "intrinsic good" is a good for itself, "for the sake of" an object like money."Intrinsic good" for him is "Eudemonia=happiness."This is what ethics and virtues are for the sake of the organizing principle.Eudemonia=happiness.Today we think of happiness as a feeling.It is not a feeling for Aristotle.Best translation for eudaimonia is "flourishing" or "living well."It is an active term and way of living for him thus, "excellence."Ultimate "intrinsic good" of "for the sake of."Eudaimonia is the last word for Aristotle.Can also mean fulfillment.Idea of nature was thought to be fixed in Greece convention is a variation.What he means is ethics is loose like "wealth is good but some people are ruined by wealth."EN isn't formula but a rough outline.Ethics is not precise; the nature of subject won't allow it.When you become a "good person" you don't think it out, you just do it out of habit!

You can have ethics without religion for Aristotle.Nothing in his EN is about the afterlife.He doesn't believe in the universal good for all people at all times like Plato and Socrates.The way he thought about character of agent, "thinking about the good."In addition, Aristotle talked about character traits.Good qualities of a person who would act well.Difference between benevolent acts and a benevolent person.If you have good character, you don't need to follow rules.Aretç=virtue, in Greek not religious connotation but anything across the board meaning "excellence" high level of functioning, a peak.Like a musical virtuoso.Ethical virtue is ethical excellence, which is the "good like."In Plato, ethics has to do with quality of soul defining what to do instead of body like desires and reason.For Aristotle these are not two separate entities.

To be good is how we live with other people, not just focus on one individual.Virtue can't be a separate or individual trait.Socrates said same the thing.Important concept for Aristotle, good upbringing for children is paramount if you don't have it, you are a lost cause.Being raised well is "good fortune" a child can't choose their upbringing.Happenstance is a matter of chance.

Pleasure cannot be an ultimate good.Part of the "good life" involves external goods like money, one can't attain "good life" if one is poor and always working.Socrates said material goods don't matter, then he always mooched off of his friends!Aristotle surmises that the highest form of happiness is contemplation.In Aristotle's Rhetoric, he lists several ingredients for attaining eudaimonia.Prosperity, self-sufficiency, etc., is important, thus, if you are not subject to other, competing needs.A long interesting list.It is common for the hoi polloi to say pleasure=happiness.Aristotle does not deny pleasure is good; however, it is part of a package of goods.Pleasure is a condition of the soul.In the animal world, biological beings react to pleasure and pain as usual.Humans as reasoning beings must pursue knowledge to fulfill human nature.It must be pleasurable to seek knowledge and other virtues and if it is not there is something wrong according to Aristotle.These are the higher pleasures and so you may have to put off lower pleasures for the sake of attaining "higher pleasures."

Phronçsis= "intelligence," really better to say "practical wisdom."The word practical helps here because the word Phronçsis for Aristotle is a term having to do with ethics, the choices that are made for the good.As a human being, you have to face choices about what to do and not to do.Phronçsis is going to be that capacity that power of the soul that when it is operating well will enable us to turn out well and that is why it is called practical wisdom.The practically wise person is somebody who knows how to live in such a way so that their life will turn out well, in a full package of "goods."For Aristotle, Phronçsis is not deductive or inductive knowledge like episteme; Phronçsis is not a kind of rational knowledge where you operate in either deduction or induction, you don't go thru "steps" to arrive at the conclusion.Therefore, Phronçsis is a special kind of capacity that Aristotle thinks operates in ethics.Only if you understand what Aristotle means by phronesis do you get a hold on the concept.My way of organizing it, it is Phronçsis that is a capacity that enables the virtues to manifest themselves.

What are the virtues?Phronçsis is the capacity of the soul that will enable the virtues to fulfill themselves.Virtue ethics is the characteristics of a person that will bring about a certain kind of moral living, and that is exactly what the virtues are.The virtues are capacities of a person to act well.All of the virtues can be organized by way of this basic power of the soul called Phronçsis.There are different virtues, but it is the capacity of Phronçsis that enables these virtues to become activated.Basic issue is to find the "mean" between extremes; this is how Aristotle defines virtues.

Humans are not born with the virtues; we learn them and practice them habitually."We reach our complete perfection through habit."Aristotle says we have a natural potential to be virtuous and through learning and habit, we attain them.Learn by doing according to Aristotle and John Dewey.Then it becomes habitual like playing a harp.Learning by doing is important for Aristotle.Hexis= "state," "having possession."Theoria= "study."The idea is not to know what virtue is but to become "good."Emphasis on finding the balance of the mean.Each virtue involves four basic points.

1. Action or circumstance.Such as risk of losing one's life.
2. Relevant emotion or capacity.Such as fear and pain.
3. Vices of excess and vices of deficiency in the emotions or the capacities.Such as cowardice is the excess vice of fear, recklessness is the excess deficiency.
4. Virtue as a "mean" between the vices and deficiencies.Such as courage as the "mean."

No formal rule or "mean" it depends on the situation and is different for different people as well.For example--one should eat 3,000 calories a day.Well depends on the health and girth of the person, and what activity they are engaged in.It is relative to us individually.
All Aristotle's qualifications are based on individual situations and done with knowledge of experience.Some things are not able to have a "mean" like murder and adultery because these are not "goods."
Akrasia= "incontinence" really "weakness of the will.Socrates thought that all virtues are instances of intelligence or Phronçsis.Aristotle criticizes Socrates idea of virtue, virtue is not caused by state of knowledge it is more complicated.Aristotle does not think you have to have a reasoned principle in the mind and then do what is right, they go together.

The distinctions between continent and incontinent persons, and moderate (virtue) and immoderate (not virtuous) persons is as follows:

1. Virtue.Truly virtuous people do not struggle to be virtuous, they do it effortlessly, very few people in this category, and most are in #2 and #3.
2. Ethical strength.Continence.We know what is right thing to do but struggle with our desires.
3. Ethical weakness.This is akrasia incontinence.Happens in real life.
4. Vice.The person acts without regret of his bad actions.

What does Aristotle mean by "fully virtuous"?Ethical strength is not virtue in the full sense of the term.Ethical weakness is not a full vice either.This is the critique against Socrates idea that "Knowledge equals virtue."No one can knowingly do the wrong thing.Thus, Socrates denies appetites and desires.Aristotle understands that people do things that they know are wrong, Socrates denies this.Socrates says if you know the right thing you will do it, Aristotle disagrees.The law is the social mechanism for numbers 2, 3, 4.A truly virtuous person is their own moral compass.

I recommend Aristotle's works to anyone interested in obtaining a classical education, and those interested in philosophy.Aristotle is one of the most important philosophers and the standard that all others must be judged by.

Finally --- something clear
This book is the first intro to Aristotle I have read which really seems like an intro --- and is really clear.Pakaluk takes it seriously --- and the introduction in the book is worth the price of the book alone.This is a great way to get a course on the Ethics that you never got in college.Pakaluk is one of the world's experts on the topic and reading the book you understand why.Get a good translation of the Ethics, sit down with this introduction, and it will get you through the Ethics as if you were in college again.Except it will make sense this time. ... Read more

Product Description
Aristotle's great work The Organon - see the entire set of philosophy titles at www.Ravenbrook.org ... Read more

Product Description
'Robinson's book is an extremely lucid and engaging overview of Aristotle's entire system of thought...Accessible to beginning students' - Richard Kraut, Northwestern University. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

Spectacular
I picked this book up about sixth months ago before diving into a serious and focused study of Aristotle. I knew barely anything about his philosophy beforehand, and after reading a number of Aristotle's works and some other scholarly works about his ideas, I know hardly more about them than I did after reading this book. Whether you're already familiar with Aristotle and want to see a fuller picture or are looking for an introduction, this book short book is all you need.

Great work that helps to "illuminate" Aristotle's philosophy
I read this book for a graduate seminar on Aristotle.Timothy Robinson's "Aristotle in Outline," is a great introductory work to understanding Aristotle's philosophy.We only have lecture notes of Aristotle's works, so no finished texts survive, which is one of the reasons we need books like Robinson's to "polish" Aristotle's arguments.

Aristotle wrote treatises, he wrote to find results and doesn't leave questions unanswered.Aristotle is the first biologist.His way of thinking is scientific.He doesn't use story telling or myth like Plato.Aristotle is a realist, a naturalist, an empiricist.Plato was more of a rational intuitionist.Aristotle believed we were born into a fully real world.We are natural beings.There is no "higher" realm for him, unlike Socrates and Plato.This is also counter to the major religions.Thus, natural life is not a "fallen" condition he is more Greek than Plato is in this regard.The Egyptians influenced Plato and Socrates.Everything Aristotle does begins with what we normally encounter in the world.Thus, our body, and human passions are natural.

Aristotle finds that the desire to understand is intrinsic in human beings it is in our nature.Philosophy is the ultimate consequence of desire.Our desires have many aspects; such as, food, sex, etc.Curiosity is natural in humans, we see it especially in small kids, and curiosity comes from within us.Aristotle argues that philosophy caps off curiosity and wonder.Aristotle points out that wonder is an actual disposition.Aporia = "blocking," something is blocking our wondering as a disturbance and then we struggle to break through with wonder to find the answer.Breaking through aporia can't just be forced but must come from things known.Aristotle always begins his inquiries with observing the familiar.The difference between Plato and Aristotle is that Plato's dialogues use aporia but leave unanswered questions; Aristotle argues that if you try hard you can break thru aporia and get at an answer.

Robinson helps to explain Aristotle's answers to these questions in his book illuminating the works of the "Physics," "Nicomachean Ethics," and the "Politics."

I recommend that this work is a must for anyone interested in philosophy, ethics, politics, or anyone who wants to have a basis of a "classical" education.For me, Aristotle is the smartest human that walked the planet!

"Aristotle in Outline"
I am delighted to add a line to the many reviews about Professor Timothy A. Robinson's "Aristotle in Outline".It contains only 125 pages; but it is definitely a dynamite. Professor Timothy A. Robinson has set a record that will stand for a long time.

arresting aristotle
It is rare to find a professional philosopher who writes as clearly, simply, and comprehensively as does Professor Timothy A. Robinson. Moreover, his intended audience will be delighted to have found this gem"of an outline."

[By the way, this book has served a purposethat probably was not envisioned by Professor Robinson. It has formed thebasis of my World Religions course - introductory unit. The class is madeup of special education students, identified slow learner, learningdisabled, gifted, as well as some general and advanced students. They don'tknow they are "doing Aristotle" and yet they are hooked. I cannotthink of a better recommendation for this book.]

The bibliographic essayis one of the best I have ever read. Hackett would do well to have Robinsonsign on permanently with them.

LUCID EXPLANATION OF THE ESSENSE OF ARISTOTLE
Excellent.Clearest explanation I've ever read.You can actually use Aristotle's concepts in your thinking.But it's mistitled. "Aristotle In Outline" suggests Cliff's Notes.A much better title would be"The Essense of Aristotle." ... Read more

Product Description
From Content:

"Things are said to be named 'equivocally' when, though they have a common name, the definition corresponding with the name differs for each. Thus, a real man and a figure in a picture can both lay claim to the name 'animal'; yet these are equivocally so named, for, though they have a common name, the definition corresponding with the name differs for each. For should any one define in what sense each is an animal, his definition in the one case will be appropriate to that case only. On the other hand, things are said to be named 'univocally' which have both the name and the definition answering to the name in common. A man and an ox are both 'animal', and these are univocally so named, inasmuch as not only the name, but also the definition, is the same in both cases: for if a man should state in what sense each is an animal, the statement in the one case would be identical with that in the other. Things are said to be named 'derivatively', which derive their name from some other name, but differ from it in termination. Thus the grammarian derives his name from the word 'grammar', and the courageous man from the word 'courage'.

Product Description
Hughes explains the key elements in Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics terminology and highlights the controversy regarding the interpretations of his writings. In addition, he examines the role that Aristotle's ethics continue to play in contemporary moral philosophy by comparing and contrasting his views with those widely held today. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

We Reach Our Complete Perfection Through Habit
I read this book for a graduate seminar on Aristotle.I think Aristotle's ethics is his most seminal work in philosophy.In the early 1960's virtue ethics came to fore.It is a retrieval of Aristotle.It has very close parallels to the ancient Chinese philosophy of Confucius and the modern philosophy espoused in the 1970's called Communitarianism.

For Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics, (EN) is about human life in an embodied state.Area of inquirery for EN is "good" this is his phenomenology.What does "good" mean?He suggests good means "a desired end."Something desirable.Means towards these ends.Such as money is good, so one can buy food to eat because "eating is good."In moral philosophy distinction between "intrinsic good" vs. "instrumental good."Instrumental good towards a desire is "instrumental good" like money.Thus, money is an "instrumental good" for another purpose because it produces something beyond itself.Instrumental good means because it further produces a good, "intrinsic good" is a good for itself, "for the sake of" an object like money."Intrinsic good" for him is "Eudemonia=happiness."This is what ethics and virtues are for the sake of the organizing principle.Eudemonia=happiness.Today we think of happiness as a feeling.It is not a feeling for Aristotle.Best translation for eudaimonia is "flourishing" or "living well."It is an active term and way of living for him thus, "excellence."Ultimate "intrinsic good" of "for the sake of."Eudaimonia is the last word for Aristotle.Can also mean fulfillment.Idea of nature was thought to be fixed in Greece convention is a variation.What he means is ethics is loose like "wealth is good but some people are ruined by wealth."EN isn't formula but a rough outline.Ethics is not precise; the nature of subject won't allow it.When you become a "good person" you don't think it out, you just do it out of habit!

You can have ethics without religion for Aristotle.Nothing in his EN is about the afterlife.He doesn't believe in the universal good for all people at all times like Plato and Socrates.The way he thought about character of agent, "thinking about the good."In addition, Aristotle talked about character traits.Good qualities of a person who would act well.Difference between benevolent acts and a benevolent person.If you have good character, you don't need to follow rules.Aretç=virtue, in Greek not religious connotation but anything across the board meaning "excellence" high level of functioning, a peak.Like a musical virtuoso.Ethical virtue is ethical excellence, which is the "good like."In Plato, ethics has to do with quality of soul defining what to do instead of body like desires and reason.For Aristotle these are not two separate entities.

To be good is how we live with other people, not just focus on one individual.Virtue can't be a separate or individual trait.Socrates said same the thing.Important concept for Aristotle, good upbringing for children is paramount if you don't have it, you are a lost cause.Being raised well is "good fortune" a child can't choose their upbringing.Happenstance is a matter of chance.

Pleasure cannot be an ultimate good.Part of the "good life" involves external goods like money, one can't attain "good life" if one is poor and always working.Socrates said material goods don't matter, then he always mooched off of his friends!Aristotle surmises that the highest form of happiness is contemplation.In Aristotle's Rhetoric, he lists several ingredients for attaining eudaimonia.Prosperity, self-sufficiency, etc., is important, thus, if you are not subject to other, competing needs.A long interesting list.It is common for the hoi polloi to say pleasure=happiness.Aristotle does not deny pleasure is good; however, it is part of a package of goods.Pleasure is a condition of the soul.In the animal world, biological beings react to pleasure and pain as usual.Humans as reasoning beings must pursue knowledge to fulfill human nature.It must be pleasurable to seek knowledge and other virtues and if it is not there is something wrong according to Aristotle.These are the higher pleasures and so you may have to put off lower pleasures for the sake of attaining "higher pleasures."

Phronçsis= "intelligence," really better to say "practical wisdom."The word practical helps here because the word Phronçsis for Aristotle is a term having to do with ethics, the choices that are made for the good.As a human being, you have to face choices about what to do and not to do.Phronçsis is going to be that capacity that power of the soul that when it is operating well will enable us to turn out well and that is why it is called practical wisdom.The practically wise person is somebody who knows how to live in such a way so that their life will turn out well, in a full package of "goods."For Aristotle, Phronçsis is not deductive or inductive knowledge like episteme; Phronçsis is not a kind of rational knowledge where you operate in either deduction or induction, you don't go thru "steps" to arrive at the conclusion.Therefore, Phronçsis is a special kind of capacity that Aristotle thinks operates in ethics.Only if you understand what Aristotle means by phronesis do you get a hold on the concept.My way of organizing it, it is Phronçsis that is a capacity that enables the virtues to manifest themselves.

What are the virtues?Phronçsis is the capacity of the soul that will enable the virtues to fulfill themselves.Virtue ethics is the characteristics of a person that will bring about a certain kind of moral living, and that is exactly what the virtues are.The virtues are capacities of a person to act well.All of the virtues can be organized by way of this basic power of the soul called Phronçsis.There are different virtues, but it is the capacity of Phronçsis that enables these virtues to become activated.Basic issue is to find the "mean" between extremes; this is how Aristotle defines virtues.

Humans are not born with the virtues; we learn them and practice them habitually."We reach our complete perfection through habit."Aristotle says we have a natural potential to be virtuous and through learning and habit, we attain them.Learn by doing according to Aristotle and John Dewey.Then it becomes habitual like playing a harp.Learning by doing is important for Aristotle.Hexis= "state," "having possession."Theoria= "study."The idea is not to know what virtue is but to become "good."Emphasis on finding the balance of the mean.Each virtue involves four basic points.

1. Action or circumstance.Such as risk of losing one's life.
2. Relevant emotion or capacity.Such as fear and pain.
3. Vices of excess and vices of deficiency in the emotions or the capacities.Such as cowardice is the excess vice of fear, recklessness is the excess deficiency.
4. Virtue as a "mean" between the vices and deficiencies.Such as courage as the "mean."

No formal rule or "mean" it depends on the situation and is different for different people as well.For example--one should eat 3,000 calories a day.Well depends on the health and girth of the person, and what activity they are engaged in.It is relative to us individually.
All Aristotle's qualifications are based on individual situations and done with knowledge of experience.Some things are not able to have a "mean" like murder and adultery because these are not "goods."
Akrasia= "incontinence" really "weakness of the will.Socrates thought that all virtues are instances of intelligence or Phronçsis.Aristotle criticizes Socrates idea of virtue, virtue is not caused by state of knowledge it is more complicated.Aristotle does not think you have to have a reasoned principle in the mind and then do what is right, they go together.

The distinctions between continent and incontinent persons, and moderate (virtue) and immoderate (not virtuous) persons is as follows:

1. Virtue.Truly virtuous people do not struggle to be virtuous, they do it effortlessly, very few people in this category, and most are in #2 and #3.
2. Ethical strength.Continence.We know what is right thing to do but struggle with our desires.
3. Ethical weakness.This is akrasia incontinence.Happens in real life.
4. Vice.The person acts without regret of his bad actions.

What does Aristotle mean by "fully virtuous"?Ethical strength is not virtue in the full sense of the term.Ethical weakness is not a full vice either.This is the critique against Socrates idea that "Knowledge equals virtue."No one can knowingly do the wrong thing.Thus, Socrates denies appetites and desires.Aristotle understands that people do things that they know are wrong, Socrates denies this.Socrates says if you know the right thing you will do it, Aristotle disagrees.The law is the social mechanism for numbers 2, 3, 4.A truly virtuous person is their own moral compass.

I recommend Aristotle's works to anyone interested in obtaining a classical education, and those interested in philosophy.Aristotle is one of the most important philosophers and the standard that all others must be judged by.
... Read more

Product Description
Translated by Benjamin Jowett ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

If You Don't Want To Live In A State, You Are Either A God Or A Beast
I read this book for a graduate seminar on Aristotle.Politics is one of Aristotle's most prescient works that had a profound impact on our Founding fathers.

Nicomachean Ethics (EN) is part of political knowledge.Politics regulates when virtue does not.Laws are created for people who are not virtuous.Polis= "city or state."Humans live in society, so virtue ethics is not just for individual living, community is a shared project for the good.Aristotle starts with his method, a phenomenological attitude.He starts with pairs, male and female, builds up to ruler and subject, master and slave as a natural relationship, the 1st social community thus is the household.Household is an economic relationship and has monarchy of patriarch.Villages are a collection of households with a king.Then you have a Polis, a fulfilled complete community formed from several villages.Self-sufficiency is the mark of a Polis.An organized social relationship is Polis and a reason is being able to take care of needs of life and promote living well.Only in a Polis can you have art, philosophy, etc.All these are actualized in a Polis.Politics is natural to human life.We are meant to be social.According to Aristotle, "If you don't want to live in a state you are either a God or a beast."

Logos= "rationality or language" is what helps us to be political animals.Rational language expands capacity in human life.Since Aristotle thinks the Polis has a telos or an end then the Polis as potential comes even before the household.This is similar to the acorn having the telos to become a mighty oak tree.Politics completes the human condition for Aristotle.Need a Polis to develop other human capacities.

Aristotle's hierarchy.Slaves are a living tool for Aristotle.Aristotle argues that some people are meant to be slaves right from birth."Born to be ruled."Slavish person does not have enough rationality to rule themselves.Aristotle says not every form of actual enslavement is justified according to him.He justifies the human use of animals as a natural act.

Aristotle now wants to find what kind of government is best.In a Polis citizens have things in common.Aristotle criticizes Plato's Republic, he finds it to be overly controlling.Socrates says the soul has 3 aspects and so does the Polis.The Soul has:

1. Reason
2. Passion
3. Appetite
The Polis has:
1. Philosopher King.
2. Guardians, (military).
3. Commoners.

Both are a hierarchal ordering.Socrates and Plato talk about the state holding all property in common.This includes the state raising children after birth instead of the parents, thus there will be no family clans trying to better themselves over their neighbors.Aristotle criticizes this idea.Aristotle says a Polis is a plurality of people thus people are not all the same and a Polis must accommodate differences in people, which actually makes a Polis better.Aristotle criticizes Socrates and Plato's idea of a Polis needing to have "unity" of people.This is a contrast to the Polis of Sparta.Aristotle says the best way to integrate citizens to the Polis is to allow them taking turns in ruling it.Aristotle believes that holding property or rearing of children in common as in the Republic is wrong no one really loves children like their own and communal property never gets really taken care of.Love is diminished the less nuclear family we are.
Aristotle says you need a mix of private and public property.Thus, the best kind of Polis is a combination of a governing element.Aristotle affirms a constitutional democracy or Polity.A citizen participates in government by definition for Aristotle.

Comparison of virtue and the good citizen.Excellence of virtuous man not the same as a good citizen.There will be few virtuous men, but good citizens just have to follow the law.Aristotle says good political virtue and good moral virtue don't have to go together."Living finely then most of all is the goal of the city."

Aristotle classifies 3 types of government which occur naturally in nature and 3 types of deteriorations of those governments, they are:

1. "Monarchy," rule by one man a king, this is a top down rule.The deterioration is a "Tyranny," who is a ruler who rules for his own benefit.
2. "Aristocracy," rule by the best few men in the Polis, also this is a top down rule.The deterioration is an "oligarchy,' which he defines as rule of the rich who want to perpetuate themselves.
3. "Polity," All citizens participate in government with a constitution set above them to guide them instead of a king or aristocracy.The deterioration is a "democracy or what today we call mob rule or tyranny of the majority.He calls it rule of the poor.

Aristotle does a good job of looking at states and how they can be corrupted.Aristotle's concept of political justice and what is the best concept.What does justice mean?Not necessarily equality for all.Not all people are equal.He implies sometimes it is unjust to treat people equally.Justice is not necessarily equality for all; sometimes it would be unjust to treat all people equally.Politics is rated high by Aristotle as a human good.Education is a central feature of political life for Aristotle."But we must find the relevant respect of equality or inequality; for this question raises a puzzle that concerns political philosophy."First, because someone is unequal on hierarchy that means better than others like more virtuous.This is like "distributive justice" who gets what goods.Do you give the best flute to the best flute player which is based on merit or to the richest or best looking person?Aristotle says inequality should tip towards those who earn it on merit.His concept of equality and inequality is based on merit.Another philosopher coined a famous formula for this based on Relevant Respect:

P= Person, Q= Quality, C= Context.
It would be just to treat P1 + P2 equally or unequally if P1 + P2 are equal or unequal in Q (quality) relevant to C (content).This is a formula on how to treat people relevant to goods.This is context dependent.Allot of empirical work to be done before we use the formula.

People who fight wars control politics in the Polis.The more people who have weapons in a civilian army is a guarantee that a small group of people will not take control of the government and democracy grows, like our 2nd amendment, this is a historical perspective of the idea that works.
Democracy spreads power to citizens a bottom up structure.Expertise in relation to politics.Many professions we tend to defer to the experts for judgment, physicians, lawyers, etc.Plato's Republic does this with his advocacy of Philosopher king running government.Aristotle says the judgment of the many combined as acting as one is better then a monarch or a few wise men to run the government.In principle, pooling of multiple people to run Polis is good.Politics by nature is a communal effort so you should use all the people's expertise.Aristotle is against letting experts running the Polis they are not always the best of judges.The best judge of the function of a house is the owner, not the builder.In addition, Aristotle says there may not really be any such thing as a political expert, like a philosopher king.Aristotle advocates for a constitutional democracy a written set of laws to protect Polis from a tyranny of the majority."Law is reason unaffected by desire."A government of laws not men.A living being as the last word is not good.

Role of education in politics.Politics is coming together to foster human development and happiness for community, citizens, and improving human life like education.Aristotle says it should be public education.

I recommend Aristotle's works to anyone interested in obtaining a classical education, and those interested in philosophy.Aristotle is one of the most important philosophers and the standard that all others must be judged by.

... Read more

Product Description
The Posterior Analytics is a text from Aristotle's Organon that deals with demonstration, definition, and scientific knowledge. The demonstration is distinguished as a syllogism productive of scientific knowledge, while the definition marked as the statement of a thing's nature, ... a statement of the meaning of the name, or of an equivalent nominal formula. In the "Prior Analytics", syllogistic logic is considered in its formal aspect; in the Posterior it is considered in respect of its matter. The "form" of a syllogism lies in the necessary connection between the premises and the conclusion. Even where there is no fault in the form, there may be in the matter, i.e. the propositions of which it is composed, which may be true or false, probable or improbable. When the premises are certain, true, and primary, and the conclusion formally follows from them, this is demonstration, and produces scientific knowledge of a thing. Such syllogisms are called apodeictical, and are dealt with in the two books of the Posterior Analytics. When the premises are not certain, such a syllogism is called dialectical, and these are dealt with in the eight books of the Topics. A syllogism which seems to be perfect both in matter and form, but which is not, is called sophistical, and these are dealt with in the book On Sophistical Refutations. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Good Start
This book is a good starting place for a beginner to Aristotelian philosophy. It is somewhat abbreviated, but it is still worth checking out. It gives a brief summary of each of Aristotle's main fields of philosophy, followed by Aristotle's own explanations. I have looked for the `Pocket' version of other philosophers' works, but I haven't seen any. So I guess just Aristotle's works have been condensed in this convenient form. For a novice, or even a student of philosophy, this book is a useful and accessible resource. ... Read more

Product Description
Written by renowned Aristotle scholar Sir David Ross, this study has long been established as one of the foremost surveys of Aristotle's life, work and philosophy. With John L. Ackrill's introduction and updated bibliography, created for the sixth edition, the book continues to serve as a standard guide, both for the student of ancient history and the general reader. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Only recommended for those who need a detailed study of Aristotelian philosophy
I was thoroughly looking forward to this book on Aristotle and was greatly dissappointed. The biographical sketch of Aristotle is meager (and admittedly may be all that is available) and 90% of the book is devoted to a detailed study of Aristotelian philosophy which is extremely tedious to read. Part of the problem is that the book was originally written in the 1920s using a style of writing that is clearly directed towards a graduate level study of Aristotle. The book is also full of typographical errors which is quite unacceptable for a book that is over 80 years old and in its 6th edition.

I imagine this book will be valuable for someone looking for an exhaustive (although ponderously written) study of Aristotelian philosophy, but everyone else will likely wish to save their hard earned money for something more enjoyable. We definitely need a modern look at Aristotle along the lines of Luis Navia's wonderful book on Socrates.

Aclassic review of Aristotle
Unfortunately I can not be extremely positive about this work of Ross. Still how you will benefit from the work will depend on your expectations.If you need some summary to draw upon in an undergraduate course, this work will be helpful.But the work will not give you real insight, either because it does not intend it, or simply because it can not achieve it.Sorry that I have to talk like this on a great scholar's book.

Aristotle unraveled
Sir David Ross' explication of Aristotle's philosophy is most helpful. Aristotle's works that have survived to today seem to be post-lecture notes, a sort of "here's what I covered in today's lecture"recap. As such, Aristotle's books are sometimes confusing, occasionallycontradictory and often just plain difficult to understand. In addition,Aristotle was a scientist first and philosopher second. This makes hisworks, which we read for their philosophical content, more difficult tograsp in some cases. Further, as with any translated works, varioustranslators convey Aristotle's assertions in different ways, some of themmore useful than others.

Ross' deep understanding of The Philosopher,gained through years of study, teaching and translation, gives him thebackground needed to help the reader understand more clearly Aristotle'sposition on various subjects. Ross is able to reconcile some apparentcontradictions, to point out some of Aristotle's underlying assumptions andmake confusing passages clear.

As a graduate student in philosophy, Ifind Ross' work to be very helpful and expect to use it extensively asbackground material for my thesis. But the value derived from reading andunderstanding Aristotle is not limited to students or philosophers, and thevalue of Ross' book is wide-ranging as well. Aristotlewill be helpful tostudents, teachers or lay readers interested in philosophy but strugglingwith some of the archaic attitudes presented in many translations of ThePhilosopher's work. ... Read more

Product Description
Aristotle - the "master of those who know". For fifteen hundred years he remained the paradigm of knowledge itself, a foundational thinker in every field of inquiry. Aristotle established a systematic logic, conceived the earliest science, a rational psychology, a political science and an outline of sociology, and gave us a crucial theory of ethics. His contributions to metaphysics continue to permeate modern philosophy. He supplied the first theory of aesthetics, and investigated dialectics and semiotics - essential to debates in postmodernism. Scientific empiricism in the 17th century, however, is said to have discredited his methods. How "scientific" is Aristotle? ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Excellent Introduction
This is a very solid introduction to Aristotle and very thought-provoking as well.It is very lucid, well-organized, and one of the best in the Introducing series.

Really liked it
Quite good book in the Introducing... series, and if you like this one, make sure to pick up the Plato book also, it needs to be read after this one.

A simple yet helpful introduction to Aristotle.
Let me begin by saying that this book is far from an in-depth examination of Aristotle. It is, rather, a very elementary introduction to the philosopher and his philosophy. I rejected the idea of buying the book many times, because of it's approach; there are illustrations in pictographic form on every page. It is almost like the old "Classics Illustrated" comic books. I resented the facile approach to profound philosophy. However, the paucity of elementary introductions to Aristotle drove me to relent, and I bought it. The book is exactly what it claims to be...an introduction to Aristotle. In simple, non-philosophical language it gives an elementary introduction to the great philosopher. If you have become exasperated (as I had) at the unavailability of basic intro's to Aristotle, buy the book. Since reading the book, I have undertaken more challenging books about Aristotle, because this one gave me the elements I needed to move forward. ... Read more

Product Description
With the emergence of democracy in the city-state of Athens in the years around 460 BC, public speaking became an essential skill for politicians in the Assemblies and Councils – and even for ordinary citizens in the courts of law. In response, the technique of rhetoric rapidly developed, bringing virtuoso performances and a host of practical manuals for the layman. While many of these were little more than collections of debaters' tricks, the Art of Rhetoric held a far deeper purpose. Here Aristotle (384–322 BC) establishes the methods of informal reasoning, provides the first aesthetic evaluation of prose style and offers detailed observations on character and the emotions. Hugely influential upon later Western culture, the Art of Rhetoric is a fascinating consideration of the force of persuasion and sophistry, and a compelling guide to the principles behind oratorical skill. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (1)

intense
The convo b/w Socrates and Aristotle picks up most intensely toward the end of the book - I'd say around the pleasure chapter. Anyway, I liked her development of the Hesiod line, which she refers to throughout the work.I'd say the best part of this book is her analysis of the ethical virtues.I thought her analyses of shame were superb; although Aristotle doesn't really delve so much into this emotion, Burger cleverly interweaves it into her discussion of the virutes of character, such as courage, and she carries shame, or so it seemed to me, throughout the entire book! Besides shame, a non-virtue - as she understands it, Burger carries the greatness of soul virtue throughout the work - most interestingly is when she links it to phronesis, and thus to the beautiful and to the just. She also heavily writes on praise and blame, on which ethical virtues rest, throughout.Her Benardete-like diagrams for Book 5 are very helpful.Her discussion of intellectual virtue offers insight into how desire plays a role in phronesis.She has a lot on phronesis - how it relates to sophia, nous (esp p126), the legislative art, etc.; this should prove useful for those who (will) study A's Politics. ... Read more

Product Description
A new translation of Aristotle's classic work on the natural sciences. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Good material, but poor reproduction
So this is the standard text and I have no comments in that regard, but the book is a digital reprint and the quality of the print on the page is below standard.It is still legible, but the resolution of the characters is poor, especially the footnotes which are difficult to read at times.It looks like the book was photocopied and then printed on cheap paper.It would have been nice if there was a way to determine that the book was a digital reprint or not prior to ordering. ... Read more

Product Description

Aristotle, great Greek philosopher, researcher, reasoner, and writer, born at Stagirus in 384 BCE, was the son of Nicomachus, a physician, and Phaestis. He studied under Plato at Athens and taught there (367–347); subsequently he spent three years at the court of a former pupil, Hermeias, in Asia Minor and at this time married Pythias, one of Hermeias's relations. After some time at Mitylene, in 343–2 he was appointed by King Philip of Macedon to be tutor of his teen-aged son Alexander. After Philip's death in 336, Aristotle became head of his own school (of 'Peripatetics'), the Lyceum at Athens. Because of anti-Macedonian feeling there after Alexander's death in 323, he withdrew to Chalcis in Euboea, where he died in 322.

Nearly all the works Aristotle prepared for publication are lost; the priceless ones extant are lecture-materials, notes, and memoranda (some are spurious). They can be categorized as follows: I Practical: Nicomachean Ethics; Great Ethics (Magna Moralia); Eudemian Ethics; Politics; Economics (on the good of the family); On Virtues and Vices. II Logical: Categories; Analytics (Prior and Posterior); Interpretation; Refutations used by Sophists; Topica. III Physical: Twenty-six works (some suspect) including astronomy, generation and destruction, the senses, memory, sleep, dreams, life, facts about animals, etc. IV Metaphysics: on being as being. V Art: Rhetoric and Poetics. VI Other works including the Constitution of Athens; more works also of doubtful authorship. VII Fragments of various works such as dialogues on philosophy and literature; and of treatises on rhetoric, politics and metaphysics.

The Loeb Classical Library edition of Aristotle is in twenty-three volumes.

Customer Reviews (1)

Useful for the specialist and the student
Like most volumes in the Loeb series, the emphasis is not on word-for-word precision in the translation, but on acheiving greater readability in broader terms. Since the original text in ancient Greek is provided on the facing page, the editors assume that anyone with a little knowledge of Greek can supplement the looseness of the translation by referring to the original. And in general, the compromises made in this way are good ones throughout the series. In this case, perhaps, the translation may be a little too loose, and also given over to some unfortunate jargon that can distort Aristotle's meaning. But even so, this is still a very useful text for the specialist or the student. ... Read more

Product Description
Dick King-Smith’s mischievous narrative and Bob Graham’s sweet, humorous watercolors capture the first eight lives of a kitten who’s ready to scamper his way into hearts everywhere.

Aristotle the kitten is so adventurous that it’s a good thing cats have nine lives. What’s even better is that Aristotle has found the kind witch Bella Donna to be his owner. Somehow she is always there when he gets into trouble, whether tumbling down the chimney, tipping over a giant milk jug, or tearing away from a snarling watchdog - just as a truck comes areening by. Is it luck? Or maybe a little bit of magic? ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Could Be a Children's Classic
We selected this book at the library because my five year old son LOVES cats.Although I'd consider the story lenghty, it completely held the attention of all the children in his Kindergarten class as his teacher read our new copy as the book of the day.Of note, the cat's owner is a witch, however, it is not dominant in the story and it would not make a good Halloween tale.The thrust of the story is more of the process of growing up.A great vocabulary word from this book is woebegone.I would consider this book to be one to sit on the shelf with the classics. ... Read more

Product Description
Exploring Aristotle's philosophical method and the merits of his conclusions, Irwin here shows how Aristotle defended dialectic against the objection that it cannot justify a metaphysical realist's claims. He focuses particularly on Aristotle's metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of mind, and ethics, stressing the connections between doctrines that are often discussed separately. ... Read more