As regards the problematic sentence, καὶ τῷ ἀνδρείῳ δὲ ἡ ἀνδρεία καλόν, compare:
1102a17In each of these, καί is adverbial, not conjunctive. Thus understand καὶ τῷ ἀνδρείῳ δὲ ἡ ἀνδρεία καλόν as "But for a courageous person, too, courage is something admirable (kalon)."
καὶ τὴν εὐδαιμονίαν δὲ ψυχῆς ἐνέργειαν λέγομεν.
1161a16-17
καὶ τοῖς προγόνοις δὲ ταῦτα προσνέμεται
1161b16
καὶ ἡ συγγενικὴ δὲ φαίνεται πολυειδὴς εἶναι
1161b24
καὶ τῷ πλήθει δὲ τοῦ χρόνου
1176a5
καὶ ἐφ' ἑκάστῳ δὲ θεωροῦντι τοῦτ' ἂν φανείη·
So where's the difficulty? If I'm missing something, let me know.
2 comments:
Thus understand καὶ τῷ ἀνδρείῳ δὲ ἡ ἀνδρεία καλόν as "But for a courageous person, too, courage is something admirable (kalon)."
I don't understand the point of the "kai" thus understood. "Courage is kalon for a courageous person too": for a courageous person, too, as well as for...whom? Or: "even for a courageous person courage is kalon": for a courageous person, courage is kalon...kalon as opposed to what?
Dear Anonymous,
The way I would initially be disposed to understand the sentence is as conveying this point: "We--that is, third-person observers--certainly regard courage, and its manifestation, as something admirable; but a courageous person, too, is (of course) capable of viewing it and esteeming it for the same reasons."
This would be in opposition to the suggestion that men who march off to war are praised on grounds that really aren't accessible to them, as in the suspicion that sentiments such as dulce et decorum est are merely ways of tricking or manipulating soldiers to die on behalf of others. (These manipulations, too, are conceived of as appealing ultimately to the self-interest or self-aggrandizement of the soldiers.)
So both of the contrasts you mention, as regards both who and what, would be operative.
MP
Post a Comment