τὰ μετὰ τὰ φυσικά eBook ½ τὰ

τὰ μετὰ τὰ φυσικά [Read] ➲ τὰ μετὰ τὰ φυσικά By Aristotle – Natus-physiotherapy.co.uk Me a a e oc o o c e e a pe o p oco Ap c o e , o pa o c e c p a y e o a po e e e o a a a e o a e o a e o oc o e o e a oco a e a a a c e o a e e pe o a a , e o o y e e a Ap c o e ca c pa o o pa e o o a Me a a e oc o o c e e a pe o p oco Ap c o e , o pa o c e c p a y e o a po e e e o a a a e o a e o a e o oc o e o e a oco a e a a a c e o a e e pe o a a , e o o y e e a Ap c τὰ μετὰ PDF/EPUB or o e ca c pa o o pa e o o a po e e ec ce p e a, e a a e o poc o pa a oc e o a e oc a a a e o a c e a,e c a a y a a o e , o o a c e a a.

10 thoughts on “τὰ μετὰ τὰ φυσικά

  1. Nina Misson Nina Misson says:

    When he to whom one speaks does not understand, and he who speaks himself does not understand, that is metaphysics Voltaire

  2. Roy Lotz Roy Lotz says:

    I have very mixed feelings about Aristotle.On the one hand, he s so tedious and uninspiring This is only partially his fault everything we have of his are lecture notes, and so it is no surprise that they are stylistically wanting Many scholars think that Metaphysics contains many sections written at different times and for different purposes, which Aristotle never intended to be read together There is even one section which may not have been written by him at all This makes his work particularly this book often difficult and confusing.That being said, his ideas are not poetic either His Ethics contains ingredients to live a well balanced life, but a life curiously devoid of great passion or excitement His Rhetoric reads like a handbook for lawyers His interest in biology pervades his thinking he loves to catalog, to systematize masses of details He was the original stamp collector On top of this, Aristotle s ideas often take the form of common sense pedantically expressed to paraphrase Bertrand Russell His temper was the opposite of Plato s, who seemed to deliberately try to draw counter intuitive conclusions One often gets the feeling that Aristotle found Plato a bit excitable, and longed to make philosophy into a respectable, hard headed enterprise When engaging with his mentor s ideas, Aristotle is either 1 opposing them, or 2 trying to reconcile them with common sense The result of the latter is a strange admixture of the mundane and the mystic.But his positive qualities are equally compelling Compare Aristotle s careful claims, his scrupulous definitions, and systematic procedure to Plato s artistic style Plato was the master of the straw man Compelling as the dialogue form is, it allowed Plato to caricature his opponents positions and get away with some pretty sloppy thinking Aristotle will have none of this Plato sought to banish all poets from his Republic, and maybe he himself would have been barred entry Aristotle would have waltzed right in.It is hard to evaluate the argument of this book, if only because it is so disorganized and wordy Aristotle does do a good job in pointing out the logical absurdities of Plato s theory of Ideas However, his own theory of Form and Substance is curiously similar, and is liable to some of the same criticisms To me, this shows just how much Aristotle was under the influence of his old teacher even though he tried to wrest himself free, he gets sucked back in An Afterthought Plato and Aristotle are perfect antidotes for different places and times When emotion, superstition, fanaticism, and sophism reign, Aristotle is where it s at But, for me, our world is sometimes too systematic, too commonsensical, and too averse to abstract argument Plato is like a glass of cool water.

  3. Riku Sayuj Riku Sayuj says:

    The PlanI had been able to bring together my notes thoughts for the earlier parts of this reading Those can be found here Book 1 A Preliminary Outline of PhilosophyBook 2 An Introduction to Philosophical Problems Book 3 The Basic Instruments Of Philosophy From Book 4 onwards, it becomes slightly harder to talk about the books in isolation Also, A became easier to follow so I stopped using so many supplementary resources I will try to put up a review here incorporating my reading notes, additional thoughts, criticisms, doubts, ideas and a few unwarranted digs at Aristotle as soon as I can Meanwhile, I am planning to now move into The Organon and Physics next.The original plan was to progress in an orderly fashion through the great philosophical works before reading the modern ones all first hand but Sartre has thrown a spanner into that plan by being so irresistible So now the new plan is to read in parallel the moderns and the ancients and to meet somewhere in the middle, some day

  4. AC AC says:

    An awful text use Ross Greek text.The story goes thus Jaeger was working on a text of the Metaphysics, when W.D Ross published with Oxford his magnificent two volume text with commentary in 1924 Of course, Jaeger, who had already done a lot of work, had to scrap his project He did, however, then publish two long articles in German on the text and manuscripts of the Metaphysics, discussing various textual crux in a series of lemmata These are reprinted in his Scripta Minora They are an utter embarrassment Illogical, confused, they show that Jaeger had no grasp at all of technical philosophy, and what is worse no grasp of Aristotle And even less sense of what textual criticism is all about By the time the OCT decided to put out a Metaphysics in the 1950 s, someone there decided to give old Jaeger who was now living in the U.S having conveniently forgotten his Dritte Humanismus of the 1930 s a chance to salvage some of his old work So Jaeger and I have this on good authority took out Ross text, pulled out his old notes, and a red pen, and started making changes Of course, this is not how a scientific text is put together one doesn t just add or subtract words based on mood or on how it strikes you it has to be done in a thoroughly scientific manner based on the rules of textual criticism which is based on stemmatics, etc conjecture being only the move of last resort Well, Jaeger was not daunted by scruples of this sort, and produced a text that is an absolute mess unrecognizable in nearly every sentence He turns Ross elegant Aristotle into gibberish adding clauses, deleting clauses, rearranging not just words, but clauses and sections all based on his Jaeger s own surmises, surmises that are themselves based on a very poor understanding of what Aristotle was all about.Anyway avoid BTW even Jaeger s developmental interpretation of Aristotle was not original, but was based on the obscure work of a man named Case from an article in the famous 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

  5. Jesse Jesse says:

    What is the being of that thing which underlies any phenomenon The central question of metaphysics is an intriguing one, and it must be said for the benefit of all the atheists on here who might think that this is a religious question, it is a perfectly scientific query, for it is in fact the question of, how can we say a person is the same person even though all of her organs have been shed and renewed, or, in the case of an artefact, how is a house the same house after it has been renovated Now Aristotle s foray into the fog beyond the flux is one of the most fascinating of intellectual mountains to climb however, you must bring an oxygen pack that is, you must take many mulling walks, or, my preference, many sips of coffee Substance is that thing which is the unqualified subject of the categories quantity, quality, relation, place, time, position, state, activity, passivity but it is also the bearer of form in fact, species form So substance must be the essence, or the what it was to be that thing the literal translation from the Greek of essence but substance isn t a universal atheists applaud for it is possessed of thisness this thing here in Greek , and so it is ontologically separate and independent yet, it must not just carry form and matter, it must actually be form, specifically of a species An outstanding ambiguity of this account is, is the form that is the soul for a person an individual, in which case there are as many forms as there are particulars, or is the form something intermediate between universal and particular Nussbaum thinks the former Lear thinks the latter Now Aristotle explicitly says, Substance isn t a universal , so there are no substantial universals by the way, Russell, who was an atheist, believed in substantial universals, so will you please stop thinking about God We will get to God, but it is not yet but if thisness, which is a quality of substance, means particular, as Nussbaum thinks, then Aristotle is open to the charge that, if no two things have the same form, which follows on this account, then form cannot be identified with the what it was to be that thing but form is to be identified with essence, because matter is just potential, it can potentially have form, but in itself, matter is nothing So there is that problem Another problem is, Aristotle says that only the universal can be cognized if so, then we can t know the essence, because if the essence is substance, and substance isn t universal, then it is unintelligible These problems are left unsolved in the text Species form is obviously a variety of universals, yet one can argue that universals are dependent upon particulars, but species form informs both as an ontologically independent reality this seems compelling than the particularists, but it entails believing in the same thing that Plato believed in that there are separate forms informing particulars So either Aristotle just restated what Plato said in new terminology, sprinkled with common sense prejudices pedantically expressed as Russell so aptly put it, or he falls into contradictions everywhere Good God Well, I guess that s why Aristotle believes in God Every effect has a distinct cause in nature, so to stop the infinite regress, there must be a God But God is pure form, unchangeable Yet, it was stated in the Physics that to change is to be changed not so for God How Well, God inspires love OH Yeah, so every form in matter is striving to actualize itself further in a teleological process of development of the whole of nature, and so each part, and God as pure form just makes everyone go nuts, like he s doing some heavy metal solo and every metalhead with form is just banging their heads away that s like the universe And how do we know that God is totally shredding, inspiring everyone and everything with respect to form actuality Well, you will admit that change is everywhere Yes So, like, don t you think change has always been I mean, hold on, let me take a drag, mmmm so, wow.So, man, there s been change for eternity.Wow.And if change then time time s eternal too man.But like, the world s always been here.Aw man but that s like impossible if change is for eternity cause then the world would be just like, not it d be like, changed, you know Yeah But think of it this way Change and time are just a part of the universe, and if there is at least one eternal thing as a part of the universe, then there must be an eternal thing that is the whole universe Therefore, God exists QED maaan Cool But God doesn t love you.What God can t love you, because he is perfect and thinking about himself, cause when you re perfect, who ya gonna think about Something less perfect That would be funny No man, God s thinking about God for eternity So we have to love God in order to actualize our form which is our essence how do we do that By doing what God does contemplating form himself.How do we contemplate form man By studying Aristotle Aristotle was apparently the world s first master of academic self promotion.

  6. Tyler Tyler says:

    This was fascinating I summarized the whole thing after I finished, as I am wont to do with books of this nature I just don t feel like reproducing the summary There is so much to go over, it is ridiculously intense Getting a glimpse inside Aristotle s mind is fascinating Everything is a cycle And everything is explained touched upon I look forward to reading Ptolemy s additions to his cosmology and Proclus comments on this book in his Commentary on Euclid Five stars, because although there were some contradictions here and there, overall I thought it was a solid piece of literature that expanded my view of the universe and mathematics.

  7. Dean the Phantasy Guru Dean the Phantasy Guru says:

    Considered by many academics to be the most challenging work throughout all of literature, Aristotle s Metaphysics is than just fancy words and non sensical theorems It deals with the most important theme possible being existence both generally and specifically For the Greek philosopher, nothing takes precedence over being because without being, there would be nothing In other words, Aristotle deals with First Principles of knowledge by determining what composes the fabrics of our very existence Ultimately, he concludes that substance, essence, form and matter and the unity established between them is out of necessity the so called fabrics of not just being but nearly everything, with a few exceptions The most difficult challenge in reading a work of this intellectual magnitude is understanding the difference between substance, essence, form and matter and how they apply differently to becoming a potentiality, therefore a non actualized state of being and being the state after becoming is actualized like ourselves Moreover, Aristotle s treatise on being is not devoid of faith for he will demonstrate in the final books that the so called Unmoved Mover i.e God is responsible for setting all actions into motion which allows everything that is in a potential state to be actualized being Without sparking controversy, many scholars claim that Aristotle s interpretation of God as the Unmoved Mover being the first philosophy to conceive of a single, omnipotent God greatly influenced The Holy Bible and the way God is portrayed throughout its holy pages On a final note, I fear that this read would be too difficult for most readers which is why I highly recommend taking a course like I did or read additional guides to aid you in your endeavour in conquering this intimidating book Read it for its genius, read it for its impact on Western culture but most of all, read it for a personal challenge and feel proud that Aristotle was indeed mortal and human like ourselves, even though his timeless wisdom suggests otherwise.

  8. Alan Johnson Alan Johnson says:

    This translation of Aristotle s Metaphysics by Hippocrates G Apostle is apparently now out of print When I read it in 1969, I was impressed with the accuracy of the translation as well as with Hippocrates Apostle s Glossary and editorial commentary Equally serviceable translations are doubtlessly available today, though I have not consulted them.The term metaphysics should not mislead the twenty first century reader Unlike Plato, Aristotle exhibited no trace of mysticism in his surviving works, including this one In this treatise Aristotle explored the fundamentals of being and of the logic of being He approached these questions from a philosophical rather than from what we would now call a scientific perspective Aristotle addressed scientific matters in many other treatises, including his Physics which is properly translated as physical nature rather than that branch of science that is now called physics Metaphysics, for Aristotle, was the study of first principles, of being qua being Although modern science makes Aristotle s concepts unfamiliar to us, this work sets forth some of the architectonic principles of scientific thinking, including Aristotle s famous principle of contradiction or noncontradiction A thing cannot both be and not be at the same time and in the same respect.7 5 2018 Note I have now concluded that the following is a accurate translation Aristotle s Metaphysics , trans and ed Joe Sachs Santa Fe, NM Green Lion Press, 2002.

  9. Erick Erick says:

    Aristotle is painfully pedantic It was very hard to keep my mind focused on the endless digressions he took in order to refute other philosophers in mind numbing detail He spent very little time actually laying out his own system in much needed detail Specifics on his own system were lacking in this work One element that was noticeably absent was his approach to time If time is uncreated, then his first mover is in a dualistic relationship with time if it is created, then he faces the consequence that time itself is an ideal form and all of his digressions in order to point out the contradictions of idealist philosophers become moot at that point Time must be eternal, if the contradictions of ideal forms in regards to time, be valid If time is eternal, there are many problems Aristotle has to address that are just as contradictory as those he points out in the idealist philosophers This work didn t cover any of that Maybe his other works do.I will have to read of him later, but it won t be anytime soon I admit I tried to read through this quickly I will read his Physics next, whenever I get around to it There are too many questions I have that this book didn t address It or less was a refutation of other Greek philosophers and little else.I am not a fan of Aristotle Reading this work hasn t changed that I do think there is some good exercises in logic in this book, but I see very little value in anything else here His system is flawed I believe I still remain of a Platonist.

  10. Faris Faris says:

    Aristotle s first act of divine motion in his Physics is a set of logical implications and applying his scientific method rightfully so given he invented it He justifies what he calls the first mover or Divinity by continuing the Aristotelian narrative of placing the mind or intellect as the ultimate objective surpassing thesoul.This would be an example of Aristotelian privilege Here Aristotle doesn t need to explain his divine inception into what God is, he asserts it, and by asserting it he had made the mistake of being corrected ironically from himself Duality and as well as sub having different functions An example of having duality in thoughts is when a person is drinking coffee with a friend, he s simultaneously enjoying the coffee and the conversation Moreover, he uses a multiplicity to try to escape the idea of dual thinking and initiates only a firstTo elaborate, Aristotle s Divine mover or God in his physics is unchanging, yet influences change in substances The problem here is his assertion on a beginning Here he arrives at multiple paradoxes if his divine is in a state of self contemplation, how did we access it, and find it Why should his first mover be unique and exempt from anything

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *