Dificultades con <em>Physica</em> II 4: la confrontación dialéctica de Aristóteles con las opiniones precedentes sobre el azar y la disputa en torno a la identidad de sus portavoces

Iván de los Ríos Gutiérrez

doi:10.3989/arbor.2014.769n5002

Authors

Iván de los Ríos Gutiérrez Universidad Andrés Bello

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2014.769n5002

Keywords:

Aristotle, Physica, endoxa, chance, atomism

Abstract

This article examines Aristotle’s critical account of the three groups of opinions on chance presented in Physica [Phys.] II 4-6 and considers the question of the identity of the advocates of these ideas. Aristotle confronts three common beliefs according to which: i) nothing happens by chance; ii) chance is the origin of everything; iii) chance is the instrument of a divine dimension inscrutable to the human mind. However, we find no explicit references to any authors. Who are the deniers of chance and who are its proponents? Who identifies chance with divine functions or particular deities? This article aims to outline the debate on the identity of the advocates of these common beliefs and to contribute to its clarification within the frame of the Aristotelian criticism on ancient atomism.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aristóteles (1894). Ethica Nicomachea. Bywater, I. (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Aristóteles (1955). De Caelo. Allan, D. J. (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Aristóteles (1956). Physica. Ross, W. D. (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Aristóteles (1957a). Metaphysica. Jaeger, W. (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Aristóteles (1957b). Politica. Ross, W. D. (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Aristóteles (1959). Ars rhetorica. Ross, W. D. (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Aristóteles (1961). Aristotle’s Protrepticus. An Attempt at Reconstruction. Du.ring, I. (ed.). Göteborg-Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.

Aristóteles (1968). Analytica Priora et Posteriora. Ross W. D. (ed.). London: Oxford University Press.

Aristóteles (1995a). Física. Madrid: Gredos.

Aristóteles (1995b). Ética a Nicómaco. Madrid: Gredos.

Arnim, H. von (ed.) (1964). Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. Stuttgart: Teubner.

Diels, H.; Kranz, W. (1951-1952). Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (6ª ed.). Weidmann: Zürich-Hildesheim.

Juan Filópono (1887). In Aristotelis Physicorum, Libros Tres Priores. Vitelli, H. (ed.). Berlin: Reimer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110807974 http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110807974

Simplicio (1882). In Aristotelis Physicorum, Libros Quattuor Priores. Diels, H. (ed.), Berlin: Reimer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110805017

Temistio (1900). In Aristotelis Physica Paraphrasis.

Shenkel, E. (ed.). Berlin: Reimer. Aubenque, P. (1963). La prudence chez Aristote. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Bailey, C. (1928). The Greek atomists and Epicurus: a study. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Blanche, L. (1981). Démocrite a-t-il cru au hasard? Revue de l'Enseignement philosophique, XXXI, pp. 27-33.

Boeri, M. D. (1993). Aristóteles. Física I y II. Boeri, M. D. (trad., introd. y com.). Buenos Aires: Biblos.

Buriks, A. A. (1948). Peri tuxhs. Leiden: Leiden University.

Cambiano, G. (1994). Automaton. Studi Storici. Rivista Trimestrale dell´Istituto Gramsci, 3, pp. 613-633.

Cioffari, V. (1935). Fortune and fate from Democritus to Sto. Tomas. New York: Columbia University.

Charlton, W. (1970). Aristotle’s Physics. Books I and II. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Diller, H. (1972). Oψισ των αδηλων τα φαινομενα. Hermes, 67, pp. 14-42.

Edmunds, L. (1972). Necessity, chance and freedom in the early atomists. Phoenix, 26, pp. 342-357. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1087594

Dudley, J. A. J. (1997). The evolution of the concept of chance in the Physics and Ethics of Aristotle. A commentary on Phys. II, 4-6. Leuven: Universiteit Nijmegen.

Edelstein, L. (1967). The idea of Progress in Classical Antiquity. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

Isnardi Parente, M. (1966). Techne. Momenti del pensiero greco da Platone a Epicuro. Florencia: La Nouva Italia.

Kaul, N. (1965). Der Zufall und die Theorie des tragischen Handlungsablaufes bei Aristoteles. Köln: Universität zu Köln.

Langerbeck, H. (1935). Docis epirusmih. Studien zu Demokrits Ethik und Erkenntnislehre. Berlin: Neue Philologische Untersuchungen.

Leunissen, M. (2010). Explanation and teleology in Aristotle´s sciencie of nature. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511762499

Magris, A. (1984). L'idea di destino nel pensiero vantico. Udine: del Bianco Editore.

Mansion, A. (1913). Introduction à la physique aristotélicienne. Lovaina-Paris: Institut Supérieur de Philosophie.

Micheli, G. (1998). Il concetto di automa della cultura greca dalle origini al sec. IV a. C. Rivista della Storia della Filosofia, 3, pp. 421-462.

Nussbaum, M. C. (1986). The fragility of goodness. Luck and ethics in Greek tragedy and philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Quand, W. (ed.) (1962). Orphei Hymni, Berlin.

Rohde, E. (1901). Der Tod des Aeschylus. En Kleine Schriften, vol. II. Tu.bingen: J.C.B. Mohr Verlag, pp. 209-211.

Ross, W. D. (1960). Aristotle’s Physics. A revised text with introduction and commentary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Ross, W. D. (1975). Aristotle’s Metaphysics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Rossi, G. (2011). El azar según Aristóteles: estructuras de la causalidad accidental en los procesos naturales y en la acción. Sainkt Agustin: Academia Verlag. Verbeke, G. (1961). Philosophie et conceptions préphilosophiques chez Aristote. Revue Philosophique de Louvain, 59, pp. 405-430. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/phlou.1961.5083

Vlastos, G. (1945). Ethics and Physics? in Democritus (I). The Philosophical Review, 54, pp. 578-592. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2181547

Vlastos, G. (1946). Ethics and Physics? in Democritus (II). The Philosophical Review, 55, pp. 53-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2181570