DOCSLIB.ORG

The Early Heidegger's Aristotle: the Logic of Possibility

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Early Heidegger's Aristotle: the Logic of Possibility The Early Heidegger’s Aristotle: the Logic of Possibility James Nicholas Garrett Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2013 The School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, The University of Melbourne Produced on Archival Quality Paper 1 2 Declaration This is to certify that: • the thesis comprises only my original work towards the PhD, • due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used, • the thesis is fewer than 100 000 words in length, exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. Signed, James Garrett. 3 Abstract The argument of this thesis is that Heidegger’s reading of Aristotle in the early 1920s is best understood after we have come to terms with the critique that Heidegger develops against theoretical attitude. By understanding how Heidegger determines the limitations of the theoretical attitude we can grasp the scope of Heidegger’s hermeneutic phenomenology that takes up the task of overcoming of those limitations. In particular this thesis follows the development of an underlying opposition in Heidegger’s work from 1919 to 1924. This opposition is staged around competing interpretations of the structural elements at work in the actualisation of research. Specifically these structural-logical elements are the understanding of unity and simplicity within the contexts of vision, speech and action that underlie the way that research takes up an object and understands its own possibilities and ends. When read in this way Heidegger’s reading of Aristotle is a demonstration of possibilities of research that are invisible to theoretical attitude. As we have followed Heidegger’s reconstructions of Aristotle what emerges is a representation of Aristotle’s work where Heidegger attempts to alter our presuppositions about the possibility of research and thereby alter our understanding of Aristotle’s texts. The fundamental strategy of this alteration of presuppositions is to draw out the incompatibility of the structural-logical elements as employed by the modern philosophical positions criticised by Heidegger and the research carried out by Aristotle; this thesis makes this strategy explicit. To carry out the argument we move from establishing an understanding of Heidegger’s critique of the theoretical attitude in chapter one, to examining the ways that alternative research projects may be carried out in chapter two, and then finally to closely examining Heidegger’s readings of Aristotle in 1923 and 1924 in chapters three and four. The four chapters together show how Heidegger’s arguments about the role of formalisation in research lead directly into the fundamental element in Heidegger’s early reading of Aristotle, which is the conception the human being as being primarily in logos. With this new understanding of the nature of the human being insofar as it can do research and be the object of research comes an accompanying theory of both the nature of language and a rejection of the division of mind and world. 4 Table of Contents Introduction 7 Review of Literature Chapter 1: The Unity of the Opposition 55 1.1: The Unity of Conflict 1.2: Heidegger’s Critical Beginning 1.3: Formal Indication versus the Theoretical Attitude 1.4: The Conflict in Reading Aristotle Chapter 2: The Unity of Interpretation 116 2.1: The Turn to Aristotle 2.2: Towards a New Logic 2.3: Formal Indication and Hermeneutics 2.4: The Definition of Philosophy 2.5: Category Research Chapter 3: The Unity of the Psuchē 167 3.1: Seeing and Speaking Chapter 4: The Unity of Aristotelian Research 202 4.1: Basic Concepts of Aristotelian Philosophy 4.2: Ousia and Logos 4.3: The Being of Being-There 4.4: The Interpretation of Concrete Being-There Conclusion 292 Endnotes 299 Bibliography 319 5 6 Introduction This thesis contributes to the growing literature on the early Heidegger and the early Heidegger’s reading of Aristotle in particular. The publication and translation of the relevant lecture course notes and transcripts and other assorted texts from 1919 to 1926 has revealed that many of the examples, critiques, terms and conceptual strategies of Being and Time had been reworked in several versions in the years leading up to 1926. Heidegger’s close readings of Aristotle, carried out especially between the years of 1921 and 1925, make up a significant portion of this material. From 1922 to 1924 Heidegger attempted to write a book titled Phenomenological Interpretations of Aristotle that was to be his first major publication. The contents of the work as we have them from the texts during this period clearly show that the Aristotle book was not intended as a side project but rather as a presentation of Heidegger’s new approach to phenomenology. This thesis sets out to understand the nature of the early Heidegger’s reading of Aristotle, or put another way, how did Aristotle become the vehicle, for a few years at least, for the development of Heidegger’s own philosophy. The argument of this thesis can be summarised in three points. First, Heidegger’s representation of Aristotle in the surviving lecture course manuscripts and transcripts is best couched within Heidegger’s own project of developing a hermeneutic phenomenology. We shall examine below Heidegger’s analysis of what he calls the ‘hermeneutic situation’ to show that for Heidegger the task of interpreting philosophy, and thus the work of Aristotle, is closely aligned with a 7 phenomenological understanding of the conditions of possibility for research. Second, Heidegger’s criticisms of his own philosophical contemporaries should also be understood on the basis of Heidegger’s own project. It is important to recognise that Heidegger seeks to explain the conditions of possibility of what his philosophical contemporaries and Aristotle say rather than arguing with them directly. In order to grasp this step we shall briefly examine how Heidegger uses the structure of intentionality to define how these modern prejudices function within the ‘theoretical attitude’. Third, the thesis argues that throughout his readings of Aristotle Heidegger is focused on articulating an opposition between Aristotle and certain modern ontological prejudices. Thus this thesis examines Heidegger’s reading of Aristotle within the scope of the hermeneutic situation and in opposition to the possibilities of philosophical thought within the theoretical attitude. The thesis as a whole demonstrates that Heidegger’s readings of Aristotle in the early 1920s is best understood in opposition to the kind of research, which, according to Heidegger’s diagnosis, remains limited and determined by the theoretical attitude. By understanding the stakes of the opposition, fought especially over the nature of language, we can elucidate the reasons behind the manner in which Heidegger reconstructs the nature of Aristotle’s philosophy. The structure of the thesis is made up of four chapters that are roughly chronological with respect to Heidegger’s lectures from 1919 to 1924. In the first half of the thesis, chapters one and two, we trace Heidegger’s critiques of the theoretical attitude back to their context in Heidegger’s underlying hermeneutical 8 approach and thereby elucidate the context into which Heidegger’s reading of Aristotle in the early 1920s begins. Here we should not think of Aristotle in terms of simply an influence upon or an ally of Heidegger, but rather we should pay attention to the fact that Heidegger thinks that his own project can be expressed by articulating the difference between how Aristotle confronts the possibility of research and the way in which the possibility of research is confronted within the theoretical attitude. On the one hand we shall see that it is only on the basis of Heidegger’s own understanding of the problems of research in relationship with assumptions about the being of beings that Heidegger’s representations of Aristotle and the theoretical attitude become clear. On the other hand we shall see that Heidegger’s articulation of the difference between the two perspectives provides the way that Heidegger presented his own understanding of research during the pre- Being and Time period. ‘Research’ here means an attempt to reveal beings in themselves. The opposition of research perspectives that Heidegger stages in the early 1920s plays out in relation to errors that have inhibited reflection upon what research really is. In particular, Heidegger attempts to reorient the possibility of understanding the object of human facticity and the method suitable for its analysis. In principle everything understood or experienced in any way belongs to human facticity. However, the possibility of turning back upon facticity itself and interpreting it in a way appropriate to the kind of being it is must be clarified in its scope; the historical question of the human being as a being among other beings is different from the 9 question of the human being to which all beings appear. It is the latter possibility that makes the possibility of investigating the human being ontological in scope. It is against this possibility, which provides a way in which beings can be gathered into a whole, that Heidegger measures Aristotle, the theoretical attitude and phenomenology. What this thesis uncovers is that Heidegger’s early reading of Aristotle in 1922-24 provides an intervention into the way in which the theoretical attitude understands the basic structures of the linguistic articulation of knowledge. While phenomenology may begin with the recognition
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Edward C. Halper One and Many in Aristotle's Metaphysics: Books Alpha
    Philosophy in Review XXX (2010), no. 3 Edward C. Halper One and Many in Aristotle’s Metaphysics: Books Alpha- Delta. Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing 2009. 535 pages US$48.00 (cloth ISBN 978-1-930972-21-6) When the present book, the long-awaited follow-up to Halper’s 1989 volume on the central books of the Metaphysics, is joined by the concluding volume on books iota-nu that we may hope to appear as promised in 2011, the three volumes together will surely constitute the most important and welcome event in Aristotle scholarship since the publication of Joseph Owens’ The Doctrine of Being in the Aristotelian Metaphysics in 1978. Indeed, Halper’s opus may be seen as a manifestation of a certain coming of age in the modern study of ancient philosophy, in which neither historicism nor an uncritical embrace of the interpretive tradition any longer prevent engaging the ancients in philosophical inquiry that both honors the historical context of ancient thought and is responsive to contemporary philosophical concerns. Not that Halper imposes contemporary concerns upon his reading of Aristotle; on the contrary, he finds that efforts to use Aristotle’s thought to address contemporary issues have tended to obscure his reasoning, and it is with Aristotle’s reasoning—his systematic argumentation—that Halper is most concerned. Halper recounts how the early 20th century projected onto Aristotle a developmental path from idealism to empiricism, whereas in the postwar era he came to be seen as a linguistic philosopher. What these hermeneutical strategies have in common, Halper discerns, is not that they set out to make Aristotle speak to contemporary concerns, but rather simply that the absence of a systematic intentionality accorded to the text leads them to seek an animating dynamic outside the text, ‘and it is natural that the connections they think of are those that are most alive and interesting to them’ (36).
    [Show full text]
  • Teleology in the Later Middle Ages
    90 Chapter four Teleology in the Later Middle Ages Robert Pasnau A history of teleology might be expected to register an upward spike of enthusiasm through its middle chapters, as the heightened religious commitments of European philosophy inspired a soaring interest in finding ultimate reasons for why the world is the way it is. In fact, however, teleological explanation is one of the legacies of antiquity that received a surprisingly muted response in the Middle Ages. As we will see, there was little enthusiasm for Aristotle’s natu- ralized approach to teleology, and grave doubts over whether final causes are a legitimate kind of cause at all. The one place where reflection on ends did play a robust role in medieval philosophy was in ethics. Even here, however, the consensus of antiquity— that human beings are and ought to be ultimately motivated by their own happiness— met with growing resistance and eventually out- right rejection. Robert Pasnau, Teleology in the Later Middle Ages In: Teleology. Edited by: Jeffrey K. McDonough, Oxford University Press (2020). © Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190845711.003.0006 Teleology in the Later Middle Ages 91 4.1. Final Causes in Nature Although the character of teleological explanation shifted in the Middle Ages, there was never any doubt over the fundamental assumption that nature, in some sense, acts for a purpose. Averroës, for instance, in the series of commentaries that lies at the foundation of the European re- vival of Aristotelianism, insisted that the principle that nature acts for a purpose is “maximal and fundamental” in both physics and theology.1 This is to say that, for anyone working in one of these two sciences, it should be accepted as a self- evident first principle that there is a goal at which the natural world aims.
    [Show full text]
  • Emotions in Medieval Thought
    c Peter King, forthcoming in the Oxford Handbook on Emotion. EMOTIONS IN MEDIEVAL THOUGHT No single theory of the emotions dominates the whole of the Middle Ages. Instead, there are several competing accounts, and differences of opin- ion — sometimes quite dramatic — within each account. Yet there is consensus on the scope and nature of a theory of the emotions, as well as on its place in affective psychology generally. For most medieval thinkers, emotions are at once cognitively penetrable and somatic, which is to say that emotions are influenced by and vary with changes in thought and belief, and that they are also bound up, perhaps essentially, with their physiological manifesta- tions. This ‘mixed’ conception of emotions was broad enough to anchor me- dieval disagreements over details, yet rich enough to distinguish it from other parts of psychology and medicine. In particular, two kinds of phenomena, thought to be purely physiological, were not considered emotions even on this broad conception. First, what we now classify as drives or urges, for in- stance hunger and sexual arousal, were thought in the Middle Ages to be at best ‘pre-emotions’ (propassiones): mere biological motivations for action, not having any intrinsic cognitive object. Second, moods were likewise thought to be non-objectual somatic states, completely explicable as an imbalance of the bodily humours. Depression (melancholia), for example, is the pathological condition of having an excess of black bile. Medieval theories of emotions, therefore, concentrate on paradigm cases that fall under the broad concep- tion: delight, anger, distress, fear, and the like. The enterprise of constructing an adequate philosophical theory of the emotions in the Middle Ages had its counterpart in a large body of practical know-how.
    [Show full text]
  • Is”: Hans Jonas and the Revival of a Teleological Ethical Theory
    DERIVING “OUGHT FROM “IS”: HANS JONAS AND THE REVIVAL OF A TELEOLOGICAL ETHICAL THEORY A Dissertation Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Joseph M. Farrell August 2010 Examining Committee Members: Lewis Gordon, Advisory Chair, Philosophy Joseph Margolis, Philosophy Jane Gordon, Political Science Joseph Schwartz, External Member, Political Science i © Copyright 2010 by Joseph M. Farrell ii ABSTRACT Hans Jonas ranks among a small but expanding group of recent ethicists who have argued that a robust ethical theory must account for human ontological considerations. He is among those who make claims that such considerations issue from biological foundations. In The Phenomenon of Life , he reclaims elements of the Aristotelian biological ontology of the soul while adjusting this ontology to the theory of evolution. The first problem with Aristotelian biological ontology, one suffering from essentialism, is the confrontation with the biological flux of species, presented in the Darwinian theory of natural selection. The dissertation explains that Jonas was correct in his return to Aristotle, insofar as there are elements of human beings that are natural and universal. The task is to follow Jonas by constructing a robust philosophical anthropology. Jonas’s philosophical anthropology understands human beings as nature’s most magnificent and advanced examples of what he calls “needful freedom.” Jonas’s argument includes a refutation of reductive materialism and epiphenomenalism, one that leaves the possibilities of the human soul/consciousness and freedom in at least as good a position as offered by Kant. His argument is also an attempt to rescue ontology, human nature, and ethics from the relativism of Heideggerian thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Synderesis and Conscience: Stoicism and Its Medieval Transformations
    Дискурсы этики SYNDERESIS AND CONSCIENCE: STOICISM AND ITS MEDIEVAL TRANSFORMATIONS Marcia L. Colish Author argues that the conscience is a theme frequently flagged as a key aspect of Stoicism. Beyond mere consciousness, our self-aware- ness as agents, moral and otherwise, conscience specifies the ethical norms we honor in judging our experience and acting on it. Scholars have studied how the Stoics think we acquire these norms, how we ap- ply them in concrete individual cases, and how we estimate this prac- tice, prospectively or retrospectively, examining our conscience and steeling ourselves to the difficulties of acting in its light. Whether these processes depend on Ancient Stoic monopsychism – the notion that the soul has no subdivisions or infrarational faculties – has also drawn attention. In tracking its medieval fortunes, whether in Stoic or modi- fied form, we will note as well some of the related ideas with which this doctrine traveled. Conscience is a theme frequently flagged as a key aspect of Stoicism. Beyond mere consciousness, our self-awareness as agents, moral and otherwise, conscience specifies the ethi- cal norms we honor in judging our experience and acting on it. Scholars have studied how the Stoics think we acquire these norms, how we apply them in concrete individual cases, and how we estimate this practice, prospectively or retrospectively, examining our conscience and steeling ourselves to the difficul- ties of acting in its light. Whether these processes depend on Ancient Stoic monopsychism – the notion that the soul has no subdivisions or infrarational faculties – has also drawn attention. Less fully explored is whether the Stoics think we can act against conscience, and if so, why and how.
    [Show full text]
  • 9783110684827.Pdf
    The Legacy of Early Franciscan Thought Veröffentlichungen des Grabmann-Institutes zur Erforschung der mittelalterlichen Theologie und Philosophie Münchener Universitätsschriften Katholisch-Theologische Fakultät Founded by Michael Schmaus †, Werner Dettloff † and Richard Heinzmann Continued in collaboration with Ulrich Horst Edited by Isabelle Mandrella and Martin Thurner Volume 67 The Legacy of Early Franciscan Thought Edited by Lydia Schumacher ISBN 978-3-11-068241-0 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-068482-7 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-068488-9 ISSN 0580-2091 DOI https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110684827 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. For details go to https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. Library of Congress Control Number: 2020944940 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2021 Lydia Schumacher, published by Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com Contents Acknowledgements IX LydiaSchumacher and Simon Maria Kopf AGuide to Citing the Summa Halensis XI Abbreviations XIII LydiaSchumacher Introduction 1 Part I: Philosophy and Theology Cecilia Trifogli The Creation of Matterinthe Summa Halensis 15 MagdalenaBieniak The Soul-Body Union in the Summa Halensis 37 Anna-KatharinaStrohschneider The Summa Halensis
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Contraries and Prime Matter in the Reception of Aristotle's Physical Corpus in the Work of Thomas Aquinas
    No. 7 (Spring 2016), 184-203 ISSN 2014-7023 THE PROBLEM OF CONTRARIES AND PRIME MATTER IN THE RECEPTION OF ARISTOTLE’S PHYSICAL CORPUS IN THE WORK OF THOMAS AQUINAS Ana María C. Minecan Universidad Complutense de Madrid e-mail: [email protected] Received: 23 Oct. 2015 | Revised: 16 March 2016 | Accepted: 15 April 2016 | Available online: 21 June 2016 | doi: 10.1344/Svmma2016.7.11 Resumen El presente artículo aborda la problemática de la asimilación de la teoría física aristotélica de los contrarios en el pensamiento cosmológico de Tomás de Aquino desarrollado en el marco de las condenas antiaristotélicas del siglo XIII. Se analiza el tratamiento ofrecido por el Aquinate a los problemas derivados de la refutación aristotélica de las teorías eleáticas de Parménides y Meliso, así como su aceptación, sin apenas modificaciones, de la mecánica física aristotélica como arquitectura propia del mundo ya creado. Palabras clave: Tomás de Aquino, Aristóteles, cosmología, principios naturales, contrarios Abstract This paper deals with the reception of the Aristotelian physical theory of contraries in the cosmological thought of Thomas Aquinas, developed in the context of the condemnations of Aristotle in the thirteenth century. It also discusses the way in which Aquinas addressed the problems derived from the Aristotelian refutation of the Eleatic theories of Parmenides and Melissus, as well as his acceptance, without significant modifications, of Aristotelian physical mechanics as the architecture of the created world. Key Words: Thomas Aquinas, Aristotle, cosmology, natural principles, contraries SVMMA 2016 184 The Problem of Contraries and Prime Matter Ana María C. Minecan The recovery of Aristotle’s treatises on physics in Latin medieval Europe from the twelfth century onwards, and their subsequent arrival to the major universities of the time caused a severe commotion that shook the foundations of Christian doctrine (VAN STEENBERGHEN 1972: 80-84).
    [Show full text]
  • General Introduction
    MP_A02.qxd 11/17/06 5:26 PM Page 1 General Introduction Medieval Philosophy in Perspective In the modern mind, the adjective “medieval” has often been associated with ideas of darkness, dogmatism, oppression, and barbarity. This should not be surprising, if we con- sider how modernity came to define itself, precisely in opposition to the medieval tradition, as the Renaissance, the re-birth of ancient learning, the Reformation of a corrupt church, the Enlightenment after an age of darkness, an Age of Reason after an age of ignorance and blind faith. Even today, this mentality has its visible effects. To the intellectual reflexes of “the modern mind” referred to above, the very phrase “medieval philosophy” until fairly recently sounded almost like an oxymoron, indeed, so much so that in modern curricula of the his- tory of philosophy the medieval period was barely mentioned, and even nowadays it is skipped by some philosophy departments, boldly leaping from ancient philosophy directly to the study of Descartes (ignoring about two thousand years of Western intellectual history). To be sure, this situation is happily changing. In the larger scheme of things this is prob- ably due to the fact that we live in a postmodern period, in which the grand, defining ideas of modernity itself have become at least questionable, if not discredited, as a result of mod- ern historical experience (think world wars, industrialized genocides, global exploitation of people and nature, the manipulative uses of “values,” ideologies and religions, etc.). This postmodern perspective, by revealing the various limitations of the “grand ideas” of mod- ernity, naturally prompts historical and philosophical reflection on their validity in history, and thus on their emergence from developments in the medieval period.
    [Show full text]
  • Editors' Introduction
    1 Jeffrey E. Brower and Kevin Guilfoy ______________________________________________________________________________ EDITORS’ INTRODUCTION • Content and Structure of the Volume o Literary writings o Dialectical writings o Philosophical theology o Ethics • A Complete List of Abelard’s Writings Peter Abelard (1079–1142) is a philosopher and theologian whose reputation has always preceded him. Indeed, to this day he remains among the best-known figures of the entire Middle Ages.1 Although one can hardly overestimate the value of his intellectual legacy, his reputation owes at least as much to his flamboyant personality and to the sensational details of his biography. Very early on Abelard established his place as one of the most celebrated masters in Paris by challenging—and then defeating—his teachers and rivals in public disputation. In some cases, he literally drove these rivals out of business: he stole their students and set up his own schools (the first when he was only twenty five) just down the road from them. He aroused the fiercest devotion in students, and the fiercest enmity in rivals. He also inspired the love and devotion of (some would say merely seduced) a seventeen-year-old Heloise. But when Heloise became pregnant and ran away with him to be secretly married, Abelard earned the hatred of her uncle and guardian, Fulbert, who was also the cannon of Notre Dame. In fact, Fulbert’s anger 2 was so great that he hired a group of thugs to seize Abelard and have him castrated, in an effort to put a quick end to their relations. Although Abelard spent the rest of his days as a monastic— he and Heloise having taken religious vows shortly after his castration—he continued to provoke the strongest reactions among those he encountered.
    [Show full text]
  • Augustine and Aquinas on Original Sin and the Function of Political Authority
    Augustine and Aquinas on Original Sin and the Function of Political Authority Weithman, Paul J., 1959- Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 30, Number 3, July 1992, pp. 353-376 (Article) Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press DOI: 10.1353/hph.1992.0058 For additional information about this article http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v030/30.3weithman.html Access Provided by University of Notre Dame at 06/08/12 12:41PM GMT Augustine and Aquinas on Original Sin and the Function of Political Authorit,Y PAULJ. WEITHMAN THE REDISCOVERY OF Aristotelian moral thought in the thirteenth century influenced medieval political theory profoundly. Recovery of Aristotle's Poli- tics,' for example, made available to political theorists of the period analyses of political institutions that differed significantly from those they found in Patristic sources. Differences between Aristotle's views and those of Augustine were especially striking. Thomas Aquinas was one of the first and most influ- ential of the thirteenth-century Aristotelians. Charting the medieval assimila- tion of Aristotelian political ideas and the rejection of Augustinian politics therefore requires an adequate account of Aquinas's own political thought and of his departures from political Augustinianism." A number of friends, colleagues, and advisors have commented on various drafts of this essay. Special thanks go to Sharon Lloyd, Alasdair Maclntyre, R. A. Markus, A. S. McGrade, Michael Pakaluk, John Rawis, Theresa Rice, and Judith Shklar. Thanks are also due to the editors of theJournal oftht Histo~ of Philosophy for helpful comments. ' On the reception and interpretation of the Politics in the thirteenth and fourteenth centu- ries, see F.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Science in Late Medieval Europe
    POLITICAL SCIENCE IN LATE MEDIEVAL EUROPE: THE ARISTOTELIAN PARADIGM AND HOW IT SHAPED THE STUDY OF POLITICS IN THE WEST A Dissertation by MARY ELIZABETH SULLIVAN Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY August 2010 Major Subject: Political Science Political Science in Late Medieval Europe: The Aristotelian Paradigm and How It Shaped the Study of Politics in the West Copyright 2010 Mary Elizabeth Sullivan POLITICAL SCIENCE IN LATE MEDIEVAL EUROPE: THE ARISTOTELIAN PARADIGM AND HOW IT SHAPED THE STUDY OF POLITICS IN THE WEST A Dissertation by MARY ELIZABETH SULLIVAN Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Chair of Committee, Cary J. Nederman Committee Members, Elisabeth Ellis Erik Godwin Leah DeVun Head of Department, James Rogers August 2010 Major Subject: Political Science iii ABSTRACT Political Science in Late Medieval Europe: The Aristotelian Paradigm and How It Shaped the Study of Politics in the West. (August 2010) Mary Elizabeth Sullivan, A.B., Georgetown University Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. Cary J. Nederman This dissertation looks at Aristotelian political thinkers of the later Middle Ages and argues that they meet all of the criteria of a mature Kuhnian science. Scholars of medieval Europe have spent decades arguing over exactly how one should define medieval Aristotelianism and which thinkers qualify as Aristotelian. I answer this question by turning to the philosophy of science literature. By using the criteria laid out by Thomas Kuhn- a common education, a shared technical language and general agreement on problem choice- I am able to parse out a group of political thinkers who qualify as a scientific community.
    [Show full text]
  • Women's Secrets
    Page i Women's Secrets Page ii SUNY Series in Medieval Studies Paul E. Szarmach, Editor Page iii Women's Secrets A Translation of Pseudo­Albertus Magnus's De Secretis Mulierum with Commentaries Helen Rodnite Lemay State University of New York Press Page iv Published by State University of New York Press, Albany © 1992 State University of New York All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. For information, address State University of New York Press, State University Plaza, Albany, NY 12246 Production by Susan Geraghty Marketing by Dana Yanulavich Library of Congress Cataloging­in­Publication Data De secretis mulierum. English. Women's secrets : a translation of Pseudo­Albertus Magnus' De secretis mulierum with commentaries / Helen Rodnite Lemay. p. cm. Sometimes attributed to Albertus Magnus. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0­7914­1143­5 (alk. paper) : $49.50. — ISBN 0­7914­1144­3 (pbk. : alk. paper) : $16.95 1. Medicine, Medieval. 2. Medicine, Magic, mystic, and spagiric—Early works to 1800. I. Lemay, Helen Rodnite. II. Albertus, Magnus, Saint, 1193–1280. III. Title. R128.S3913 1992 610—dc20 91­30690 CIP 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Page v For Roslyn Schwartz Page vii Contents Acknowledgments ix Introduction 1 Authors, Dates of Composition, and the Text 1 Sources 16 Human Generation 20 Astrology 26 The Secrets of Women 32 De Secretis
    [Show full text]