Aristotle Call Canceled and New Schedule
Folks,
After talking to a number of you – who are not ready with your bit of polished logic (or can’t make the call at all) – Pat and I decided to move the second call on Organon to May 12.
We are then going to take Physics and Metaphysics out of the mix.
So, we’ll do Organon part II in May and then go right into the stuff you’ll really like – Nicomichaen Ethics, Politics, Poetics and Rhetoric.
Here’s the new schedule for the rest of the year:
Tues, May 12 – Organon Discussion II
Tues, Jun 9 – Nicomachean Ethics (in its entirety)
Tues, Jul 7 – continuing Nicomachean Ethics (in itsentirety)
Tues, Sep 8 – continuing Nicomachean Ethics (in itsentirety)
Tues, Oct 6 – Politics (Books 1-3; 8-9), Rhetoric (Book1) and Poetics
Tues, Nov 10 – continuing Politics (Books 1-3; 8-9),Rhetoric (Book 1) and Poetics
Thanks!
Phil
Cartoons with Bob Mankoff
Ifyou or your kids want to draw cartoons with the New Yorker cartoon editor onApril Fool’s Day…then join us.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I’mhosting a live webinar with Bob Mankoff tomorrow, April Fool’s Day at 5pm NYCtime.
Come join us. It’s free and fun. And then following Bob, Whitney Tilson, hedgefund manager, will be speaking. First we play with Bob then Whitney describeswhy it’s a good time to counter the fear of the markets with some a sound mindand approach.<o:p></o:p>
It’s all organized through my Facebook group – fun not fear – which is aboutcountering the negative vibes in the world with more positive, hopefulmessages.
Reminder: your assignment for April 7 – one piece of logic
Folks,
Quick reminder – you have an assignment for April 7 – polish up and understand well one piece of logic from the Organon that you can present to the whole group.
OK?
Thanks!
Phil
Aristotle – Categoriae, De Interpretatione, Analytica Priora, Analytics Posteriora (pt. 1)
Here’s theaudio recording for the Aristotle call discussing Categoriae, De Interpretatione, Analytica Priora, Analytics Posteriora (pt. 1) from 3/24.
Listen online ordownload the mp3 file and listen to it as a podcast on your iPod.
Download Categoriae_De Interpretatione_Analytica Priora_Analytics PosterioraNot Just a Book, But a CD, Too
Hello there, reading friends,
Could not help but share this musical version of our reading odyssey hatched in my geographical neck of the woods (Central Texas).
http://www.athensvsparta.com/wordpress/
Cheers,
Valerie
Short Assignment for April 7th – Aristotle
Bill, Pat, Jill, Lisa, Jenn, Stephen, Kendall, Bill and Adam,
Great call on the first three books of Aristotle’s Organon – that was some hard reading and I thought we created a *good* conversation.
We agreed that for the next call – which is April 7 – we’d have a short assignment.
Do *not* read the final two books of Organon. Instead, read what you can have of Prior Analytics and Posterior Analytics and bring one piece of logic from the text that you have polished up and understood and want to present to us.
OK?
Thank you, everyone!
Phil
Thucydides Book 4 Study Questions
Dear All,
You may find by now that Book 4 is significantly different from the narratives of the previous three books. Thucydides focuses more closely on three main arenas that were previously introduced in our earlier readings. It is an exciting book which gives us a taste of what Thucydides can do with his writing style which Books 6 & 7 will show in Sicily. Please look over our study guide questions below as you read through Books 4 and the opening chapters of Book 5 (chs. 1-26). I have made use of W. Robert Connor’s book Thucydides to help inspire discussion of this turning point in the “Archidamean War”. We will discuss the reading and these questions in our next conference call on Monday March 9. As always, let me know if any of these questions grab you enough to lead off a discussion on our next call. Enjoy!
Andre
-“festina lente” (hurry slowly)
Thucydides Book 4.1– 5.26
Three main efforts, a pivotally symbolic triptych
1. Pylos –
Comment: The narration of this event is a marked change of Thucydides’ style compared to previously related campaigns. W. Robert Connor in his assessment Thucydides (Princeton UP, 1985) writes: “Paradox has an important role in the account, and a fully appropriate one. The Pylos operation marks a major turning point in the Histories. It is the first sign of the grand reversal in which the war culminates – the Athenians, at the outset Greece’s major naval power, ultimately lose their fleet; the Spartans, traditionally a land power, acquire an empire and develop the navy to control it. Pylos is our first glimpse of the larger pattern” (Connor, 111).
Questions: What do you think of Connor’s assessment? The description of the Pylos campaign takes up a good portion of the first half of Book 4. Why has Thucydides focused more on the telling of the battle and not as much on the negotiations and politics around the battle?Why do the “rational” Athenians reject an offer of peace from the Spartans?Why do the “belligerent” Spartans offer such rational peace terms?
2. Hermocrates’ speech at Gela – an attempt at unifying ‘Sicilians’ against the influence of the Athenians.
Comment: Hermocrates’ logic is a recognition that aggressive “preventative measures” are the best form of defense in the RealPolitik world of the Greek Mediterranean. W. R. Connor argues that this speech may hearken back to Thucydides’ earlier statement on the cause of the Peloponnesian War in the first place. Thucydides’ original words are: “The truest reason, although the least evident in the discussion, was, in my opinion, that the Athenians by growing great caused fear in the Lacedaemonians and drove them into war” (1.23.6). This may be the repetition of a key theme for Thucydides about the ‘balance of power’ situation in the Mediterranean.
Questions: Once again, as with the Spartan delegation to Athens earlier in Book 4, Hermocrates’ speech is not balanced with an “antilogy” or counterpart speech as we saw Thucydides do earlier in Books 1-3. Why do you suppose Thucydides presents this speech by itself?Is he commenting on the lack of debate among people & governments? Is it a comment on the state of war at this time?Have the ‘courtesies of war’ slowly been dispensed with after so many years of destruction?
3. Brasidas’ operations in Northern Greece –
Comment: Sparta sends out a military commander with some diplomatic skills. The interesting characteristics of Brasidas are not only his ability to combine military effectiveness with politics in the Northern Greek regions, but his ability to promote the mantra of Sparta’s willingness to ‘liberate Greeks from Athenian imperialism.’ In addition, examples of Brasidas’ clemency show a ‘kinder, gentler’ version of one’s typical image of a Spartan, which helps to promote Sparta’s image. Meanwhile, “liberated city-states” continue to install pro-Spartan oligarchies in various cities won over by Brasidas’ charisma. The contrast between Brasidas and Cleon from earlier in Book 4 is inevitable: Cleon the politician-turned-commander meets Brasidas the commander-turned-diplomat at Amphipolis. Both are killed as a result of the battle, but both have made their mark on the war. Neither of them was favorable towards a peace settlement, but with both out of the way, Book 5 opens with a temporary peace that, alas, will not last. The pawns in their game, the city-states of the North, find themselves desperate to ally with a winner who can end this war. Unfortunately, the war’s changing fortunes only lead to reprisals from Athens and more bloodshed.
Questions: What about the ideal of Greek city-state independence? Can it ever exist again? Did it really ever exist prior to this?Which side, Sparta or Athens, are the real “liberators” (if any)?What part did Thucydides himself play in the battle of Amphipolis? Why did he suffer banishment as a result? Could these personal reversals affect his telling of the History? Why does Thucydides focus so much on the personalities of Cleon and Brasidas? Does this method adequately signify larger political and social trends for each of the superpowers? Does this method forecast events for the rest of the war and the post-bellum period for Greece?
Aristotle Reading and Call for 3/24
Call with Cambridge Professor Paul Cartledge
Good conversation – as always – with Professor Paul Cartledge. This time he spoke about and answered questions on ancient Greek culture in general and on Aristotle and Thucydides in particular.
Paul Cartledge is Professor of Greek History, the A G Leventis Professor of Greek Culture and a Fellow of Clare College.
Aristotle Homework
Bill,
<o:p></o:p>Thanks for sending in your homework.
Reminder to everyone else – work on your homework forTuesday. It’s not due in written form. Bill sent it because he’ll miss thecall.
Back to your points below, Bill:
– I think it’s an older translation – and that’s why weget “premiss.”
– Original premise or truth – I think the currentscientific method would say that that approach dispels the philosophicalproblems by relying on repeatable experiments to test hypotheses. you don’tneed to know the truth ahead of time – you hypothesize and then test. and thenrepeat.
– As for Aristotle – I believe you are right that hesettles on definition and “things which cannot be proved” as hisfoundation.
– As for me, I straddle the scientific method approachand the post- modern approach. I think truth might itself be a challengingconcept.
I think there is something that is fundamental – but Ithink we also participate in creating both the questions and answers. It’sdifficult to formulate my point-of-view here because I alternate betweensomething more traditionally scientific and something more influenced byelements of the post-modern approach.
– In either case, my neurons continue to dance
Phil
On Apr 3, 2009, at 10:38 AM, Swislow, Bill wrote:
<o:p></o:p>
Phil, here are my thoughts on a passage from Aristotle. SorryI’ll miss the discussion.
On page 113, line 36, he writes:
<o:p></o:p>”A man must believe in some, if not in all, ofthe basic truths more than in the conclusion.
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>And then:
“The conviction of pure science must beunshakable.”
This seems like part of the payoff for his lengthyconsiderations of syllogisms and the relationship of the premisstothe predicate. In short, the premiss of a syllogism must be betterfounded than the predicate. But how is the premiss to be founded? Ifyou believe in the unshakable conviction of science, it’s not going tobe tolerable to have infinite regress (that is, every premissisfounded on some preceding premise into infinity) or to rely oncircular logic to establish the foundation of knowledge.
What’s not clear from these passages is what, otherthan “conviction,” constitutes that foundation. It’s possible I didn’tread all the way to that payoff, or that I missed it because I didn’tfollow his argument. But if he does posit a convincingfoundation, Western civilization in all the centuries since should feelpretty foolish, since we still struggle with the issue. The best wehave to offer still seems to be faith — whether in Godunderpinning all reality or in the perfection of mathematics as the foundationof all knowledge — or some version of existentialism: Faced with the prospect of infinite regress or ofreligion, let’s more or less arbitrarily settle on the most plausibleanswer and run with it.
That seems to be more or less what Aristotle did: Inhis statement on page 124, line 31, it appears he did not pretend tohave solved the problem: “I call the basic truths of everygenus those elements in it the existence of which cannot be proved.”
<o:p></o:p>However, he does seem to hope that many of thosebasic truths can be settled upon by definition. If a triangle has three sides by definition, we can assert as a basic truth that alltriangles have three sides.
Anyway, my other great confusion is why thistranslations uses “premiss” rather than “premise.”
Bill
04. April 2009 by Arrian
Categories: Aristotle, Commentary | Tags: Aristotle | 1 comment