ellauri026.html on line 227: This is a famous line, but here it would hardly seem to merit its fame—who cares about people “arguing about how tough they are”? The word here translated as “tough” just happens to be one of the central words of Hellenic thought: arete, “virtue” or “excellence,” that subject of so many subsequent philosophy lectures—whose learnability or unlearnability Plato made the subject of inquiry, and which Aristotle defined as a mean between two vices. The word can be used to mean something like “bravery,” but it is wildly broader and richer than “how tough one is” (there is a queen named Arete in the poem, but Wilson refrains from translating her as “Queen Tough”). The line was quoted over and over again in later days because it was considered the height of happiness for a man to have a son and grandson competing with each other to possess virtue or true excellence. This Wilson suppresses, as a thing irrelevant to contemporary idiom—“toughness” will have to serve in its place.
ellauri066.html on line 476: Wrong you anglo saxon philistines! It is a technical term in Aristotle and appears in Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy 1621. Godly CS Lewis knew it too.
ellauri066.html on line 480: Victoria Pedrick, Steven M. Oberhelman (2005) Literary Criticism: “... where Aristotle exploits the threefold classification of virtues and emotions according to excess, mean, and deficiency, he uses the term epikhairekakia ...”
ellauri066.html on line 484: Nemesis (Greek: νέμεσις) is a philosophical term first created by Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics. The term means one who feels pain caused by others' undeserved success. It is part of a trio of terms, with epikhairekakia (ἐπιχαιρεκακία ) meaning one who takes pleasure in others' pain, similar to Schadenfreude, and phthonos (φθόνος) meaning one who feels pain caused by any pleasure, deserved or not, similar to envy.[1][2]
ellauri066.html on line 518: In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle used epikhairekakia (ἐπιχαιρεκακία in Greek) as part of a triad of terms, in which epikhairekakia stands as the opposite of phthonos (φθόνος), and nemesis (νέμεσις) occupies the mean. Nemesis is "a painful response to another's undeserved good fortune", while phthonos is a painful response to any good fortune of another, deserved or not. The epikhairekakos (ἐπιχαιρέκακος) person takes pleasure in another's ill fortune.[33][34]
ellauri096.html on line 67: In response to the apparent conflict between freedom and foreknowledge, medieval philosophers denied that future contingent propositions have a truth-value. That´s silly. They took themselves to be extending a solution Aristotle discusses in De Interpretatione to the problem of logical fatalism. According to this truth-value gap approach, ‘You will take a dump tomorrow’ is not true now. The prediction will become true tomorrow. A morally serious theist can agree with the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam:
ellauri096.html on line 777: Aristotle, on the other hand, took a more empirical approach to the question, acknowledging that we intuitively believe in akrasia. He distances himself from the Socratic position by locating the breakdown of reasoning in an agent’s opinion, not his appetition. Now, without recourse to appetitive desires, Aristotle reasons that akrasia occurs as a result of opinion. Opinion is formulated mentally in a way that may or may not imitate truth, while appetites are merely desires of the body. Thus, opinion is only incidentally aligned with or opposed to the good, making an akratic action the product of opinion instead of reason. For Aristotle, the antonym of akrasia is enkrateia, which means "in power" (over oneself).
ellauri099.html on line 184: Gossiping about Aristotle
ellauri099.html on line 186: Aristotle had slender calves. His eyes were small. And he spoke with a lisp, which — according to Plutarch — was imitated by some. He wore many rings and had a distinctive, rather exotic style of dress — a kind of ancient bling.
ellauri099.html on line 188: It is said that Aristotle was a difficult character — somewhat arrogant, thinking he was cleverer than everyone else (quite possibly true) and even criticizing his headmaster of many years, Plato. (Who was quite a butthead in comparison.) He was a perhaps a bit of a dyskolos, a grouch, cantankerous, a curmudgeon.
ellauri099.html on line 190: Aristotle was not much loved by the Athenians. This might have been because he was a tricky customer or because he was an immigrant: a metoikos or metic, resident alien, an ancient green card holder; Greek, but decidedly not an Athenian citizen, something like an American in London. Given his close ties to the Macedonian aristocracy, which was extending and tightening its military and political control across Greece, perhaps the Athenians were right to be suspicious of Aristotle.
ellauri099.html on line 192: We do know that after having served as Lector in the Academy and being described as its “Mind” by Plato, Aristotle was not chosen as the latter’s successor. The job of scholarch, or head of the school, by sheer happenstance, went to Speusippus, Plato’s nephew. Aristotle left Athens shortly after Plato’s death and stayed away for around 12 years. Was he angry or disappointed not to have been chosen as head of the Academy? By being ordered round by big butthead´s nephew, who was an even bigger butthead?
ellauri099.html on line 199: Famously, Aristotle was asked by Philip II of Macedon to be the tutor of his 13-year-old son, Alexander. Aristotle set up school in the Macedonian fortress of Mieza, and the young prince was taught together with his companions, who probably numbered around 30 students. A big class. This was a closed school, a boarding school of sorts. A sense of the seriousness with which Aristotle performed his duties can be gleaned from the fact that he composed two treatises in honor of Alexander, “On Kingship” and "On Colonies" as guidebooks for the prince, as well as editing a copy of Homer’s “Iliad” specifically for Alexander’s use — the so-called “casket copy” (presumably because it was small enough to fit inside his casket).
ellauri099.html on line 201: Very little is known about Aristotle’s stay in Macedonia, but it is thought that he was there for quite some time, possibly seven years, and became very friendly with powerful members of Philip’s court. In 336 B.C.E., Philip was assassinated (in a theater, of all places), and Alexander was declared king at the age of 20. Sensing the instability of political transition, the mighty city of Thebes rebelled against the new Macedonian king. In order to set an example, Alexander besieged and then wholly incinerated the city, wiping it from the map. Its citizens were either killed or sold into slavery.
ellauri099.html on line 203: Athens didn’t make the same mistake as Thebes and meekly submitted to the Macedonian pike. It is in this context that Aristotle returned to the city at around age 50. And he came back big time. Because of his metic status, Aristotle was not allowed to buy property. So — as one does — he rented. He took over a gymnasium site sacred to Apollo Lyceus (the wolf-god) and transformed it into the most powerful and well-endowed school in the world.
ellauri099.html on line 207: The reason Aristotle was able to do this was simple: money. If Plato was rich, then Aristotle was wealthier than Croesus, right up there with the Jeff Bezos-es of his day. He received the sum of 800 talents from his presumably grateful former student, Alexander, which was an enormous amount of money. (Consider that the Plato’s Academy cost about 25-30 talents.)
ellauri099.html on line 211: Whatever the truth of the matter, Aristotle’s endowment allowed him to build a huge research and teaching facility and amass the largest and most important library in the world. During the time of Theophrastus, Aristotle’s successor as scholarch and clearly a very effective college president, there were as many as 2,000 pupils at the Lyceum, some of them sleeping in dormitories. The Lyceum was clearly the place to be, the educational destination of choice for the elites.
ellauri099.html on line 215: The Lyceum was clearly the intellectual projection of Macedonian political and military hegemony. In 323 B.C.E., when news of Alexander the Great’s death in Babylon at the age of 32 reached Athens, simmering anti-Macedonian sentiment spilled over, and the popular Athenian leader Demosthenes was recalled. Aristotle left the city for the last time, in fear of his life, after a little more than a decade in charge of the Lyceum. Seeing himself justly or unjustly in the mirror of Socrates and fearing charges of impiety, Aristotle reportedly said, “I will not allow the Athenians to sin twice against philosophy.” Aristotle withdrew to his late mother’s estate at Chalcis on the island of Euboea and died there shortly after of an unspecified illness, at age 63.
ellauri099.html on line 219: In the northeast corner of the Lyceum, there was a garden, which possibly led to the peripatos, or shaded walk from which the promenading Peripatetic school derived its name. Indeed, there were gardens in all the earlier philosophical schools, in the schools of Miletus on the present-day Turkish coast, and allegedly in the Pythagorean schools in southern Italy. Plato’s Academy also had a garden. And later, the school of Epicurus was simply called “The Garden.” Theophrastus, a keen botanist like Aristotle who did so much to organize the library and build up its scientific side (with maps, globes, specimens and such like), eventually retired to his garden, which was close by.
ellauri099.html on line 226: Very low rope barriers separated off areas that visitors were not meant to visit. I looked around for a guard, saw no one, and stepped onto the green moss and made my way quietly to the location of Aristotle’s library. On my hands and knees, I saw the ground was littered with tiny delicate snail shells, no bigger than a fingernails, scattered like empty scholars’ backpacks. My partner gave me one, and I put it in my pocket. I had it on my desk right in front of me as I was writing this. Inadvertently, I crushed it to pieces under the weight of one of Mr. Staikos’s huge tomes on the history of libraries. There’s probably a moral in this, but it escapes me. The moral is this: fucking Americans, keep your fat butts and greedy fingers off European soil!
ellauri119.html on line 430: In addition to cross-cultural differences in understanding love, ideas about love have also changed greatly over time. Some historians date modern conceptions of romantic love to courtly Europe during or after the Middle Ages, although the prior existence of romantic attachments is attested by ancient love poetry. The complex and abstract nature of love often reduces discourse of love to a thought-terminating cliché. Several common proverbs regard love, from Virgil's "Love conquers all" to The Beatles' "All You Need Is Love". St. Thomas Aquinas, following Aristotle, defines love as "to will the good of another." Bertrand Russell describes love as a condition of "absolute value," as opposed to relative value.[citation needed] Philosopher Gottfried Leibniz said that love is "to be delighted by the happiness of another." Meher Baba stated that in love there is a "feeling of unity" and an "active appreciation of the intrinsic worth of the object of love." But who the fuck is Meher Baba? Biologist Jeremy Griffith defines love as "unconditional selflessness". In Hebrew, אהבה (ahava) is the most commonly used term for both interpersonal love and love between God and God's creations. Chesed, often translated as loving-kindness, is used to describe many forms of love between human beings. In Hebrew, אהבה (ahava) is the most commonly used term for both interpersonal love and love between God and God's creations. Chesed, often translated as loving-kindness, is used to describe many forms of love between human beings. The 20th-century rabbi Eliyahu Eliezer Dessler is frequently quoted as defining love from the Jewish point of view as "giving without expecting to take" (from his Michtav me-Eliyahu, Vol. 1). Rakkaus on siis ekonomisesti sulaa hulluutta!
ellauri119.html on line 458: Aristotle by contrast placed more emphasis on philia (friendship, affection) than on eros (love); and the dialectic of friendship and love would continue to be played out into and through the Renaissance, with Cicero for the Latins pointing out that "it is love (amor) from which the word 'friendship' (amicitia) is derived" Meanwhile, Lucretius, building on the work of Epicurus, had both praised the role of Venus as "the guiding power of the universe", and criticised those who become "love-sick...life's best years squandered in sloth and debauchery".
ellauri119.html on line 462: Luce Irigaray (born 3 May 1930) is a Belgian-born French feminist, philosopher, linguist, psycholinguist, psychoanalyst and cultural theorist who examined the uses and misuses of language in relation to women. Irigaray's first and most well known book, published in 1974, was Speculum non matris sed aliae mulieris (1974), which analyzes the texts of Freud, Hegel, Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, and Kant through the lens of phallocentrism. Presently, she is active in the Women's Movements in both France and Italy. Eroticism (from the Greek ἔρως, eros—"desire") is a quality that causes sexual feelings, as well as a philosophical contemplation concerning the aesthetics of sexual desire, sensuality, and romantic love. That quality may be found in any form of artwork, including painting, sculpture, photography, drama, film, music, or literature. It may also be found in advertising. The term may also refer to a state of sexual arousal or anticipation of such – an insistent sexual impulse, desire, or pattern of thoughts.
ellauri144.html on line 97: For Aristotle, youth and age represent extremes of excess and deficiency: the young (neoi) are subject to strong but quick-changing desires; they are hot-tempered, competitive, careless about money, simple, trusting, hopeful, lofty-minded; they have courage and a sense of shame; they enjoy friends and laughter; they live by honor, not advantage; they tend to hybris; in short, their failings are those of vehemence and excess. Whereas older men (presbyteroi) past their prime have the diametrically opposite failings, of deficiency: their experience of life makes them uncertain, suspicious, small-minded, ungenerous, worried about money, fearful, cold-tempered, grasping after life, and selfish; they live by the code of advantage; they are shameless and pessimistic; they live mostly in memory, talk about the past, complain a lot; they are slaves to gain; in short, both their desires and their ability to gratify them are weak.
ellauri172.html on line 242: — Aristotle, On the Heavens 295b, c. 350 BC
ellauri206.html on line 75: Diegesis (Greek διήγησις "narration") and mimesis (Greek μίμησις "imitation") have been contrasted since Plato's and Aristotle's times. Mimesis shows rather than tells, by means of action that is enacted. Diegesis is the telling of a story by a narrator. The narrator may speak as a particular character, or may be the invisible narrator, or even the all-knowing narrator who speaks from "outside" in the form of commenting on the action or the characters.
ellauri206.html on line 79: In his Poetics, the unknown Greek philosopher Aristotle argues that kinds of "poetry" (the term includes drama, flute music, and lyre music for Aristotle) may be differentiated in three ways: according to their medium, according to their objects, and according to their mode or "manner" (section I); "For the medium being the same, and the objects the same, the poet may imitate by narration—in which case he can either take another personality as Homer does, or speak in his own person, unchanged—or he may present all his characters as living and moving before us" (section III).
ellauri223.html on line 62: G.M. Under such circumstances no one will be willing to labor, while he expects others to work, on the fruit of whose labors he can live, as Aristotle argues against Plato, and as Petteri Urpo has argued on many occasions. Capt. But look at the U.S.S.R! From everyone according to their abilities, to everyone according to their needs!
ellauri223.html on line 113: They say that it is very doubtful whether the world was made from nothing, or from the ruins of other worlds, or from chaos, but they certainly think that it was made, and did not exist from eternity. Therefore they disbelieve in Aristotle, whom they consider a logican and not a philosopher.
ellauri260.html on line 316: During early Christians, the teaching of Aristotle remained the chief guide, and his attack upon usury was transplanted into Christian soil by Lactantius. The chief concern was now the soul ; material possessions were deemed to be of much inferior value. There was much in this (the ban on usury) that restricted and caused a decay of economic life. It was divided into particular transactions which had no common aim. Labour was confined within narrow channels, and had very limited aims, so that production on a large scale ceased, and great wealth became impossible. Oh fuck. The mainspring of trade was individual covetousness, and this was enough of itself to restrict the full recognition of economic activity all through the middle ages.
ellauri260.html on line 318: With the huge influx of gold and other valuable loot from the colonies (called the Renaissance), they ceased to be regarded as mere means and incidental things, and getting filth rich became again the goal (as it had been during the Roman empire as well, and the Greeks, by the way, whatever Aristotle may have said.)
ellauri260.html on line 408: This whole section here is from the article "Aristotle's Anticommunism" by Darrell Dobbs, found in the American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Feb. 1985) . . .
ellauri260.html on line 410: Hence it would indeed be a fine thing if each spoke for himself (hōs hekastos), saying "mine." But in Socrates' regime, all, when they say "mine," speak only collectively, on behalf of the polis (462d8-e3). Aristotle contends that for them to speak for themselves is impossible. Why? His reasoning turns on the nebulous connection among citizens established by familial communism. He says:
ellauri260.html on line 417: rom the soul of this older culture came the words of Aristotle : " It is the part of a free and high-minded man to seek, not the useful, but the beautiful." This acute student of men has ably described the chief types of human conduct, and has distinguished five principal shades of thought and character : great, good, those who love honour and power, those who are intent on gain and enjoyment, and, finally, criminal natures. The truth of this division is supported by the fact that it has been substantially preserved in the tradition of the Catholic Church.
ellauri384.html on line 199: 
Aristotle_with_a_Bust_of_Homer_-_WGA19232.jpg/600px-Rembrandt_-_Aristotle_with_a_Bust_of_Homer_-_WGA19232.jpg" />
xxx/ellauri075.html on line 207: Trained in the neo-Kantian tradition with Ernst Cassirer and immersed in the work of the phenomenologists Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger, Strauss established his fame with path-breaking books on Spinoza and Hobbes, then with articles on Maimonides and Farabi. In the late 1930s his research focused on the rediscovery of esoteric writing, thereby a new illumination of Plato and Aristotle, retracing their interpretation through medieval Islamic and Jewish philosophy, and encouraging the application of those ideas to contemporary political theory.
xxx/ellauri113.html on line 93: The Principle of Reason, the text of an important and influential lecture course that Martin Heidegger gave in 1955-56, takes as its focal point Leibniz's principle: nothing is without reason. Heidegger shows here that the principle of reason is in fact a principle of being. Much of his discussion is aimed at bringing his readers to the "leap of thinking," which enables them to grasp the principle of reason as a principle of being. This text presents Heidegger's most extensive reflection on the notion of history and its essence, the Geschick of being, which is considered on of the most important developments in Heidegger's later thought. One of Heidegger's most artfully composed texts, it also contains important discussions of language, translation, reason, objectivity, and technology as well as remarkable readings of Leibniz, Kant, Aristotle, and Goethe, among others. And lots of black-and-white pictures of scantily dressed women.
xxx/ellauri122.html on line 899: Baskerville uses the logic of Aristotle, theology of Aquinas, and the insights of Roger Bacon to decipher secret symbols and manuscripts. There is a stupid film based on it with the late James Bond as the lead. Both book and film are pure baloney.
xxx/ellauri170.html on line 737: Okay, again I am simplifying a little because science is never anything but theory, there is no element of faith involved. Aristotle was a scientist, Plato wasn´t. Gnosis ei ollut edes pseudotiedettä vaan salatietoa. Tiede on kreikaksi episteme.
xxx/ellauri195.html on line 288: A proper wife should be as obedient as a slave. Aristotle
xxx/ellauri261.html on line 629: Aristotle´s pantheistic conception of God as the Soul of the World was such a secular concept. [citation needed]. Historians such as Charles Freeman hold that the AD 325 Council of Nicaea did much to establish dualism in Christian thought. Dualism has greatly influenced religion and science as well. By desacralizing the natural world, dualism has left it vulnerable to exploitation and damage. It is pretty badly damaged by now, as we all can see.
xxx/ellauri400.html on line 198: Matthew Arnold subscribed to Aristotle's view,
xxx/ellauri400.html on line 223: Arnold praises Chaucer's excellent style and manner, but says that Chaucer cannot be called a classic since, unlike Homer, Virgil and Shakespeare, his poetry does not have the high poetic seriousness which Aristotle regards as a mark of its superiority over the other arts.
43