tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11017234.post111272233099666451..comments2023-11-16T07:12:40.867-05:00Comments on Dissoi Blogoi: The A, B (C?) of PleasureUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11017234.post-1135024405776113422005-12-19T15:33:00.000-05:002005-12-19T15:33:00.000-05:00Cosa dire di più su The A, B (C?) of Pleasure ? Cr...Cosa dire di più su The A, B (C?) of Pleasure ? Credo che hai reso bene l'idea! Ti potrebbe interessare un sito su <A HREF="http://www.giochi-scommesse.com" REL="nofollow">scommesse calcio</A> ? Facci un salto e vedi se trovi qualcosa di interessante! Troverai solamente scommesse calcio .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11017234.post-1112840455199878922005-04-06T22:20:00.000-04:002005-04-06T22:20:00.000-04:00I've studied Kenny's arguments thoroughly and publ...I've studied Kenny's arguments thoroughly and published rejoinders to some of them in reviews. I've also done studies of my own (more sophisticated stylometric studies, a complete review of cross-references in NE), which count against Kenny's conclusions. So I regard myself as justified in presuming the unity of NE, although admittedly (i) others who have not done such work would not be justified, and (ii) because most of my work is not published, others might reasonably take my presumption to be unjustified.  <BR/><BR/><A></A><A></A>Posted by<A><B> </B></A>Michael PakalukAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11017234.post-1112750081662313332005-04-05T21:14:00.000-04:002005-04-05T21:14:00.000-04:00This could as well be a comment on "Proofs", but l...This could as well be a comment on "Proofs", but let me post it ( more inconspicuously ) here. I would very much like to know how someone writing an introduction to the NE these days deals with the growing textual ( stylometric & historic ) argument being developed by Kenny and others that the NE is probably a posthumous compiliation of Aristotelian material, including a good deal of early ( BKs I and X ) work, that fits not so well with the intervening books. The two essays on pleasure are only one obvious piece of evidence that we have at best a rather carelessly assembled Aristotelian anthology, and not a work of Aristotle before us.<BR/><BR/>How do you present this situation to a general audience? Do you just assume or presume that the NE can be approached as a unified philosophical work? Or, if Kenny's "deconstruction" of the text is to be faced and discounted , what sort of arguments need to be deployed against it ? I genuinely don't know how I could stand before an undergraduate class these days and present the NE as a coherent text.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com