Metodologia em Aristóteles: o tratado eudêmio sobre a amizade
Résumé
ResumoEstudos recentes vêm avaliando a aplicação de afirmações metodológicas de Aristóteles nos contextos investigativos em que comparecem, em consonância à estratégia que Owen (1960) empregou no estudo do tratado sobre a acrasia; procura-se ver a maneira como Aristóteles realiza, no caso particular, os princípios gerais que faz anteceder a suas investigações. Muitos deles têm por objeto tratados das Éticas (KARBOWSKI (2015a, 2015), COOPER (2009), NATALI (2010, 2015)), ou essas obras como um todo (SALMIERI (2009), ZINGANO (2007), FREDE (2012), DEVEREUX (2015), NATALI (2007), KARBOWSKI (2014)), e há razões para isso. Nelas, Aristóteles apresenta muitas considerações que poderíamos chamar metodológicas, e a existência de duas versões (ou três, se tomarmos em consideração a Magna Moralia) de uma dada investigação fornece algo assim como um controle para uma leitura realizada sobre uma das obras, ou constitui ela mesma objeto de estudos comparativos.Nesse contexto, relativamente pouca atenção vem sendo dada a EE VII 2 §1 1235b13–18, uma reflexão sobre método que abre a seção propositiva do tratado eudêmio sobre a amizade. Neste artigo, desejo mostrar que ele fornece determinações metodológicas suplementares às de EN VII 1 1145b3–7. Farei isso a partir de uma interpretação de EE VII 2 §§2–23, onde, como irei mostrar, Aristóteles realiza as prescrições de EE VII 2 §1 1235b13–18.
AbstractThe idea that Aristotle makes use of a dialectical method in his ethical writings has been subject to intense reevaluation in recent works (KARBOWSKI (2014, 2015a, 2015), COOPER (2009), NATALI (2007, 2010, 2015), SALMIERI (2009), ZINGANO (2007), FREDE (2012), DEVEREUX (2015)). Many of them adopt the strategy of examining how Aristotle consubstanciates his methodological claims in his subsequent investigation. In this paper, I justify and apply this program to EE VII 2 §1 1235b13–18, a passage that, dispite its proximity to that of EN VII 1 1145b3–7, has not as yet received its share of attention by commentators. My main claim is that the doctrine of the focal meaning of friendship answers to the prescriptions that Aristotle presents in EE VII 2 §1. I conclude that Aristotle, in the eudemian treatise on friendships, makes use of what we could call a dialectical or aporematic procedure.
Téléchargements
Références
AUBENQUE, P. Sur la notion Aristotélicienne d'aporie. In: AUBENQUE, P. Problèmes Aristotéliciens. Paris: Vrin, 2009. p. 39–52.
AUBENQUE, P. Problèmes Aristotéliciens—Philosophie Théorique. Paris: Vrin, 2009a.
BARNES, J. Aristotle and the Methods of Ethics. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, v. 34, n. 133/134, p. 490–511, 1980.
__________. Method and Metaphysics—Essays in Ancient Philosophy I. Oxford : Clarendon Press, 2011.
__________. Philosophy and Dialectic. In: BARNES, J. Method and Metaphysics—Essays in Ancient Philosophy I. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. p. 164–73.
__________. An Oct of the EE R. R. Walzer, J. M. Mingay (edd.): Aristotelis Ethica Eudemia. (Oxford Classical Texts.) Pp. xx + 162. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991. £13.50. The Classical Review, v. 42, n. 01, p. 27–31, 1992.
BERTI, E. Muntiplicité et Unité du Bien selon EE I 8. In: MORAUX, P.; HARLFINGER, D. Untersuchungen zur Eudemischen Ethik. Berlim: Walter de Gruyter, 1971. p. 157–184.
BRUNSCHWIG, J. Aristote—Topiques, tome I, livres i–iv. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1967.
BRUNSCHWIG, J. Observation and Research. In: BRUNSCHWIG, J.; LLOYD, G. E. R.; PELLEGRIN, P. Greek Thought—A Guide to Classical Knowledge. Cambridge, Massachusets, Londres: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2000. p. 72–93.
BRUNSCHWIG, J. Aristote—Topiques, tome II, livres v—viii. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2007.
COOPER, J. M. NE VII. 1–2: Introduction, Method, Puzzles. In: NATALI, C. Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics, Book VII—Symposium Aristotelicum. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. p. 9–40.
DEVEREUX, D. Scientific and ethical methods in Aristotle's Eudemian and Nicomachean Ethics. In: HENRY, D.; K. M. N. Bridging the Gap between Aristotle's Science and Ethics. Londres: Cambridge University Press, 2015. p. 130–147.
FREDE, D. The Endoxon Mystique: What Endoxa are and What They are Not. In: INWOOD, B. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. p. 185–216.
HARLFINGER, D. Die Überlieferungsgeschichte der Eudemischen Ethik. In: MORAUX, P.; HARLFINGER, D. Untersuchungen zur Eudemischen Ethik. Berlim: Walter de Gruyter, 1971. p. 1–50.
KARBOWSKI, J. Is Aristotle's Eudemian Ethics Quasi-Mathematical. apeiron, p. 1–19, 2014.
____________. Phainomena as Witnesses and Examples: The Methodology of Eudemian Ethics I 6. In: INWOOD, B. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. p. 193–226.
____________. Endoxa, facts, and the starting points of the Nicomachean Ethics. In: HENRY, D.; NIELSEN, K. M. Bridging the gap between Aristotle's science and ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015a. p. 113–29.
KRÄMER, H. J. Zur Geschichtlichen Stellung der aristotelischen Metaphysik. Kant-Studies, v. 58, n. 1–4, p. 313–54, 1967.
LESZL, W. Logic and Metaphysics in Aristotle. Padova: Altenore, 1970.
MONTAGNES, B. The Doctrine of the Analogy of Being according to Thomas Aquinas. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 2004.
NATALI, C. Rhetorical and Scientific Aspects of the Nicomachean Ethics. Phronesis, v. 52, p. 364–381, 2007.
NATALI, C. Posterior Analytics and the Definition of Happiness in NE I. Phronesis , v. 55, p. 304–24, 2010.
NATALI, C. The search for definitions of justice in Nicomachean Ethics 5. In: HENRY, D.; NIELSEN, K. M. Bridging the Gap between Aristotle's Science and Ethics. Londres: Cambridge University Press, 2015. p. 148–68.
OWEN, G. E. L. Logic and Metaphysics in Some Earlier Works of Aristotle. In: DÜRING, I. Aristotle and Plato in the Mid-Fourth Century. Götenburg: [s.n.], 1960.
__________. Tithenai ta phainomena. In: NUSSBAUM, M. Logic, Science and Dialectic: collected papers in greek philosophy. Nova Iorque: Cornell University Press, 1986. p. 239–51.
ROSS, W. D. Aristotle's Metaphysics, volume I. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924.
__________. Aristotle's Metaphysics, volume II. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924.
__________. Aristotelis Politica. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957.
__________. Aristotelis topica et sophistici elenchi. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1958.
__________. Aristotelis analytica priora et posteriora. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964.
SALMIERI, G. Aristotle's Non-'Dialectical' Methodology in the Nicomachean Ethics. Ancient Philosophy, v. 29, p. 311–35, 2009.
SHIELDS, C. Order in Multiplicity—Homonymy in the Philosophy of Aristotle. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999.
SIMPSON, P. The Eudemian ethics of Aristotle—translated with explanatory comments and accompanying translation of Aristotle's On Virtues and vices. New Brunswick, Londres: Transaction Publishers, 2013. 411 p.
SUSEMIHL, F. Aristotelis quae feruntur Magna Moralia. Leipzig: Teubner, 1883. 126 p.
SUSEMIHL, F.; APELT, O. Aristotelis Ethica Nicomacheia. 3ª. ed. Leipzig: Teubner, 1912. 279 p.
WALLIES, M. Topica cum libro de sophisticis elenchis. Leipzig: Teubner, 1923.
WALZER, R. R.; MINGAY, J. M. Aristotelis Ethica Eudemia. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. 162 p.
WARD, J. Focal Reeference in Aristotle's Account of Φιλία: Eudemian Ethics 2. Apeiron, v. 28, n. 3, p. 183–205, 1995.
WILSON, M. Aristotle's Theory of the Unity of Science. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000.
ZILLIG, R. O que é "verdadeiro, mas não esclarecedor" segundo a Ética Eudêmia. Archai, v. 20, p. 231–254, 2017.
ZINGANO, M. Aristotle and the Problems of Method in Ethics. In: SEDLEY, D. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. p. 297–330.
___________. Unidade do gênero e outras unidades em Aristóteles: significação focal, relação de consecução, semelhança, analogia. Analytica, v. 17, n. 2, p. 395–432, 2013.
___________. The Conceptual Unity of Friendship in the Eudemian and the Nicomachean Ethics. apeiron, v. 48, n. 2, p. 195–219, 2015.
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
Les auteurs publiant dans cette revue acceptent les clauses suivante:
- Les auteurs conservent les droits d'auteur et cèdent à la revue le droit de première publication, leur travail étant autorisé sous le régime de la Licença Creative Commons Attribution donnant la permission du partage du travail avec reconnaissance de qualité d'auteur et première publication dans cette revue.
- Les auteurs ont l'autorisation de s'engager parallèlement dans des contrats en vue de la divulgation non-exclusive de la version du travail publié dans cette revue (ex.: publication dans une archive institutionnelle ou comme chapitre d'un livre), avec reconnaissance de qualité d'auteur et première publication dans cette revue.
- Les auteurs sont autorisés et vivement encouragés à publier et divulguer leur travail sur la Toile (ex.: dans des archives institutionnelles ou sur leur page personnelle) avant comme après le processus éditorial, dans la mesure où cela peut générer des améliorations, mais également favoriser la réception du travail publié (voir O Efeito do Acesso Livre).
