Colóquio Ethica Nicomachea - livro VI
15 a 17 de
- 14h00 : Gavin Lawrence (University of California) : Aspects of Wisdom: Aristotle and Phronesis
- 15h30 : Hendrik Lorenz (Princeton University) : Aristotle´s Practical Philosophy
- 17h00 : Cristina Viano (CNRS, Paris) : Sur la vertu naturelle
- 10h00 : C. D. C. Reeve (University of North Carolina) : Nicomachean Ethics VI: translation and commentary (introduction to the text)
- 14h00 : C. D. C. Reeve (University of North Carolina) : Nicomachean Ethics VI: translation and commentary (discussion of the text)
- 14h00 : Michael Pakaluk (Institute for the Psychological Sciences) : Practical Truth
- 15h30 : Fabio
- 17h00 : Catherine Darbo (CNRS, Paris) : tba
Organização : Marco Zingano mzingano@usp.br www.fflch.usp.br/df
10 comments:
It was interesting finding your blog after watching those conferences, and had a deliteful dinner with you, Reeve, Hendrik et al.
The only bad thing was we couldn't talk very much, but that's okay, I guess.
Again, congrats on your bold paper and presentation, though work in progress. (-:
OK, BUT
Be warned, everybody:
you should not read a commentary by someone else until after you have read the book (IN How to Read a Book by Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren)
Do you think we should read How to Read a Book to know that or should we trust commentary?
(by the way, I read both Adler's book and Aristotle's. liberal education is the way to go, though even America forgets that at times. one can realize that just by analyzing young Americans reactions to St. John's College, or its very high acceptance rate compared to Chicago or Columbia, which supposedly offer "great books" curriculae, but in a very smaller degree.)
Let's start again from here, if you wish. Two rules: 1. give arguments, 2. avoid even the appearance of abusive language.
Let's start again from here, if you wish.
Speaking only for me, no, thanks, not with this guy, until and if he apologizes (yes, I think he wronged me; if you think otherwise, I will not try to change your mind). For argument supporting the rule, the public may look at the book I have just quoted.
Michael,
Typically, within a philosophical exchange, isn't it too difficult to avoid even the appearance of being abusive? I'm not sure I know the answer, by the way. But doesn't it seem that philosophical behavior (e.g., Socrates') tends to look abusive to non-philosophers?
Sincerely answering, I suppose I would say that I don't think Socrates appears abusive--but proud and boastful, perhaps. Can you think of a counterexample from Plato or Xenophon? Actually, Socrates is extremely gracious, and irony can be cutting or contemptuous, but it can hardly constitute abusive language (note that using abusive language is different from being abusive).
Michael,
Thanks for the reply. Socrates never appears to me to be abusive. But to lots of non-philosophers he does. And if there's a difference between being abusive and using abusive language (I think there isn't), he also appears to lots of non-philosophers to use abusive language. So they say, anyway; and you and I have no reason to disbelieve them, do we?
I don't think Socrates appears abusive.... Can you think of a counterexample from Plato or Xenophon?
How about Gorgias 494e?
Well, indeed.
Post a Comment