Aristotle, the Socratic. Some Limits of Aristotle’s Review on Socratic Intellectualism [Spanish]

Authors

  • Esteban Bieda Universidad de Buenos Aires Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)

Keywords:

Sócrates, Aristóteles, incontinencia, intelectualismo, ética.

Abstract

Aristotelian criticism of the so called “Socratic intellectualism” in Nicomaquean Ethics VII is well known. However, on many occasions Aristotle gives part of reason to the Socratic position. The aim of this work is twofold: (i) to review a specific aspecto of the way in which Aristotle may have understood Socratic intellectualism specially regarding someone who is actually knowing that what he or she is aboutto do is wrong; (ii) to review why, in that specific aspect, Aristotle’s own position is not, as is often said, so distant from the Socratic.


Author Biography

Esteban Bieda, Universidad de Buenos Aires Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)

Universidad de Buenos Aires

Ivestigador CONICET

References

<div>Bieda, E. (2003). La filosofía práctica y el método dialéctico aristotélicos: ¿es la argumentación práctica una especie de dialéctica? Areté, XV(2), 193-215. Recuperado de: http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/arete/article/view/482/476</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Bieda, E. (2011). Creer o saber, esa no es la cuestión. Opinión y conocimiento en el Protágoras de Platón. Circe de clásicos y modernos, XV(1), 27-40. Recuperado de: https://cerac.unlpam.edu.ar/index.php/circe/article/view/2494/2392</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><div>Bieda, E. (2012). Boceto de una desintegración psíquica en el Gorgias de Platón. Hypnos, XXIX, 237-257. Recuperado de: https://hypnos.org.br/index.php/hypnos/article/view/183/185</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Boeri, M. (2010). Aristóteles. Acerca del alma. Buenos Aires: Colihue.</div><div><br /></div><div>Broadie, S. (1991). Ethics with Aristotle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Calvo Martínez, T. (2000). Aristóteles. Acerca del alma. Madrid: Gredos.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Cooper, J. M. (2009). NE VII. 1-2: Introduction, Method, Puzzles. En C. Natali (Ed.), Aristóteles. Nicomachean Ethics, Book VII. Symposium Aristotelicum (pp. 9-40). Oxford: Oxford University Press</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Dahl, N. O. (1984). Practical Reason, Aristotle and Weakness of the Will. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Gauthier, R. A. &amp; Jolif, J. Y. (1970). Aristote. L’Éthique a Nicomaque. Paris: Publications Universitaires.</div><div>Gómez-Lobo, A. (1998). La Ética de Sócrates. Santiago de Chile: Andrés Bello.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Gosling, J. (1990). Weakness of the Will. London &amp; New York: Routledge.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Gulley, N. (1965). The Interpretation of ‘No One Does Wrong Willingly’ in Plato’s Dialogues. Phronesis, X(1), 65-90. doi:10.1163/156852865X00086</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Hamlyn, D. W. (1968). Aristotle’s De Anima Books II, III. Oxford University Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Hardie, W. F. R. (1968). Aristotle’s Ethical Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Joachim, H. (1962). Aristotle-The Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Kenny, A. (1979). Aristotle’s Theory of the Will. London: Duckworth.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Makin, S. (2006). Aristotle. Metaphysics. Book ?. Oxford: Clarendon Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Natali, C. (1999). Aristotele. Etica Nicomachea. Bari: Laterza.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Pallí Bonet, J. (1985). Aristóteles. Ética nicomaquea-Ética Eudemia. Madrid: Gredos.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Platón (2008). Protagoras. N. Denyer (trad.). Oxford: Cambridge University Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Polansky, R. (2007). Aristotle’s De Anima. Oxford: Cambridge University Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><div>Reeve, C.D.C. (2014). Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Indianapolis: Hackett.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Robinson, R. (1977). Aristotle on Akrasía. En J. Barnes, M. Schofield &amp; R. Sorabji (Eds.), Articles on Aristotle. 2 Ethics and Politics (pp. 79-91). London: Duckworth.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Rorty, A. O. (1980). Akrasia and Pleasure. En A. O. Rorty (ed.), Essays on Aristotle’s Ethics (pp. 267-284). Los Angeles: University of California Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Ross, W.D. (1925). Aristotle. The Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Rowe, C. &amp; Broadie, S. (2002). Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Shields, C. (2016). Aristotle. De Anima. Oxford: Clarendon Press.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Sinnot, E. (2007). Aristóteles. Ética nicomaquea. Buenos Aires: Colihue.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Tricot, J. (1947), Aristote. De l’ame. Paris: Vrin.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Vigo, A. (1999). Incontinencia, carácter y razón según Aristóteles. Anuario filosófico, XXXII(1), 59-105. Recuperado de: https://revistas.unav.edu/index.php/anuario-filosofico/article/view/29594/25977</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Vigo, A. (2002). Autodistanciamiento y progreso moral. Reflexiones a partir de un motivo de la ética socrática. Diadokhé, 5(1-2), 65-101.</div></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div></div>

Downloads

Published

2020-12-12

Issue

No. 35 (2021): January-june

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Eidos

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term "Work" shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher a nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons 3.0 License Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported CC BY-NC 3.0, or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions: (a) Attribution: Other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;(b) Noncommercial: Other users (including Publisher) may not use this Work for commercial purposes;
4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
5. Authors are permitted, and Eidos promotes, to post online the preprint manuscript of the Work in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work is expected be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Eidos's assigned URL to the Article and its final published version in Eidos.