Journal of Philosophical Investigations

Rhetoric and Its Relationship with Politics in Aristotle's Thought

Fatemeh Raygani; Ali F ath Taheri; Alinaqi Baghershahi; Meysam Sefidkhosh

Volume 17, Issue 44 , November 2023, , Pages 222-241

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2022.52677.3326

Abstract

Rhetoric, being among five arts of logic (i.e., Sana’at Khams), is a persuasive yet uncertain art. However, philosophers consider it as a non-philosophical and invalid art. In ... Read More

Studying Aristotelian Syllogism according to Implicative and Conductive Accounts

Hamideh Bahmanpour; Morteza Hajhosseini; Gholamreza Zakiani

Volume 17, Issue 43 , August 2023, , Pages 20-46

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2022.50808.3153

Abstract

Aristotelian Logic, the oldest system of reasoning, has always been come into focus. The Syllogism as the focal issue amid Aristotle’s logic has caused many controversial discussions. ... Read More

Universal and Particular in Aristotle's Works

Amir Hossein Saket

Volume 17, Issue 43 , August 2023, , Pages 384-399

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2022.52162.3259

Abstract

Evidently the greek terms καθόλου and καθ’ ἕκαστον appeared first in Aristotle’s ... Read More

A Comparative Study of the Subject of Metaphysics by Aristotle and Scotous

Asghar Fathi; Ali Karbasizadeh

Volume 16, Issue 39 , September 2022, , Pages 453-465

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2021.42825.2708

Abstract

At the beginning of the fourth book of metaphysics, Aristotle speaks of knowledge as "existing as existing and its inherent effects" and in other places he refers to this book as "the ... Read More

Hellenic and Hellenistic Origins in the Aesthetics of Pseudo-Dionysius

Seyyed Mohsen Mousavi

Volume 16, Issue 39 , September 2022, , Pages 480-494

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2021.46755.2883

Abstract

Text This article studies the Hellenic and Hellenistic sources of Pseudo-Dionysius on Beautiful, and its purpose is to clarify the extent of the influence of the philosophy of Plato, ... Read More

The Logos of Heraclitus from the phenomenological perspective of another beginning of Martin Heidegger

Mohammad Javad Safian; Jamal Same

Volume 16, Issue 39 , September 2022, , Pages 495-513

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2021.45658.2806

Abstract

Undoubtedly, Heraclitus and Parmenides are permanent sources of Heidegger's thought. What has given these two a special place in Heidegger's thought is Heidegger's special conception ... Read More

An Analysis of the Aristotelian Ethographos Art

Camellia Talei Bafghei; Maryam Soltani Kouhanestani

Volume 16, Issue 38 , May 2022, , Pages 448-476

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2021.45644.2804

Abstract

The term of Ethos was first appeared in the 5th century BC, meaning "nature", "habit" and "custom", in the character of heroes. This term gradually found its place in the views of philosophers ... Read More

The Comparison between Aristotle's and Frege's Analyses of the Categorical Proposition

Ahmad Hamdollahi

Volume 16, Issue 38 , May 2022, , Pages 644-669

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2020.41337.2653

Abstract

The main question of this article is that what are the important differences or similarities between Aristotle's and Frege's analysis of the categorical proposition? Based on the famous ... Read More

Analysis of Akrasia from the perspective of Alfred Mele and its comparison with Aristotle's point of view

Mohammad Taqdisi; Zahra Khazaei; Mohsen Javadi

Volume 14, Issue 33 , February 2021, , Pages 80-96

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2020.40773.2615

Abstract

Akrasia, or moral weakness, for Aristotle and many contemporaries, including Alfred Mele, means the freely, intentionally action contrary to one's decisive better judgment, which occurs ... Read More

Machiavelli's Break from the Foundations of Aristotle's Political Philosophy

Mohsen Bagherzadeh Meshkibaf; Mostafa Abedi; Mahmoud Sufiani

Volume 14, Issue 31 , July 2020, , Pages 333-361

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2019.31867.2233

Abstract

In this research, we are trying to explain how Niccolò Machiavelli Basically criticizes the foundations of classical political thought, and in breaking off those foundations, ... Read More

Concept and Metaphor in Derrida

Mahdi Parsa Khanghah

Volume 12, Issue 25 , February 2019, , Pages 79-94

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2019.8011

Abstract

Abstract In this paper I provide a reading of Derrida's seminal text, "White Mythology: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy". In this text, Derrida deals with the encounter between philosophy ... Read More Abstract In this paper I provide a reading of Derrida's seminal text, "White Mythology: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy". In this text, Derrida deals with the encounter between philosophy and metaphor as an external element to philosophy. The conclusion is that Philosophy tends to internalize any external element. Philosophy considers metaphor as something ought to be subjected. Therefore, when one searches for the metaphor in philosophy, what he or she finds not the metaphor itself, but the concept of metaphor? Metaphor in the text of philosophy is the philosophical metaphor. Derrida at the end discusses the metaphor of metaphor, the tireless metaphorical movement, and unlimited metaphor as the truth of metaphor. Philosopher during its history always considers metaphors as something to be subjugated and controlled. So, metaphor in the text of philosophy is the concept of metaphor, not metaphor in itself, which according to Derrida, pure dissemination. In this sense, the origin of concepts is not conceptual. Key words: Metaphor, Derrida, Dissemination, Aristotle, Proper Name 1. Introduction In this paper we provide a reading of Derrida's seminal text, "White Mythology: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy" which deals with the encounter between philosophy and metaphoricity as its main outsider. Through an analysis of Derrida’s text and some reference to his sources, we would conclude that Philosophy tends to internalize any external element, including metaphoricity. Philosophy considers metaphor as something to be subjugated. Therefore, when one searches for the metaphor in philosophy, what he or she finds is not the metaphor itself, but the concept of metaphor. Concept of metaphor Metaphor in the text of philosophy is the philosophical metaphor, and not the literary one. Derrida at the end discusses the metaphor of metaphor, the tireless metaphorical movement, and unlimited metaphor as the truth of the concept of metaphor. During its history, philosophy always considers metaphors as something to be subjugated and controlled. Hence, metaphor in the text of philosophy is the concept of metaphor, not metaphor in itself, which is, according to Derrida, pure dissemination. A metaphor in itself is a material movement, the material production of concepts. In this sense, the origin of concepts is not conceptual, but rather a literary movement. Concepts as the elements of philosophy are just the result of something concrete and indeterminate, namely the metaphorical dissemination. It seems Derrida stands here against philosophy, but the case is that he redefines it, by taking metaphoricity as its central motor. Philosophy appears as the surface of a profound material movement of thought, which can be found in pure literature, in the work of mad literary figures such as Artaud or Mallarme. Even in the realm of mainstream philosophy, this literary movement (this madness) is tractable everywhere, from Plato to Nietzsche. Madness is the motor of reason. Therefore, what Derrida does is applying a therapy on philosophy from within through revealing a tendency in philosophy to objectify and conceptualize what is its subject matter. The will in philosophy to conceptualize meets its limit in the case of metaphor as its subject matter, because in this case philosophy conceptualizes something which inherently evades conceptualization and objectification. It indicates a will which is never fully successful and this is why everywhere in the history of philosophy we can find a literary attitude instead of a full philosophical conceptuality. Each philosophical concept is the result of the will to conceptualization applying on a non-conceptualizable entity, or better, movement. Hence, what we find in the text of philosophy is the concept of metaphor, not the metaphor in itself and its pure form, but the concept of metaphor reveals the metaphoricity of concepts. Philosophy wants to overcome metaphor, but at the end of the day, it is the latter that invades the purity of the former. Therefore, instead of the concept of metaphor, Derrida introduces the metaphor of metaphor, which is not any more a concept, but rather a movement. The relation between concept and metaphor is like that of signified and signifier in Derrida’s early work. What is called signification is not any more under the governance of signified, as is in the classical structuralism, but rather it turns to be a movement from signifier to signifier, having the transcendental signified as eliminated. Transcendental signified is the concept as a halt in the movement of signification. What is the case here is not that the concept does not exist, but rather is the genetic movement of concept, how it comes into existence. Derrida performs a genealogy of concept, seeking its formation in the course of history, or rather in the course of the history of philosophy. Here, we can find a very good example of what is called deconstruction, useful to understand what Derrida does on other problematics, such as writing, being a book, nature and culture, etc. 2. Aristotle on Metaphor Derrida demonstrates the will to conceptualization in philosophy through some references to Aristotle, specifically when he tends to reduce any polysemy into univocity. This tendency is called logos. This is the reign of proper name over philosophy and human thinking (and human as thinking animal) in general. Only things that have proper name exist. Without a proper name nothing is a thing, so it is nothing. This is the renouncement of plurality in general. Instead, Derrida brings forward the idea of a pure multiplicity in the idea of dissemination. It is the multiplicity of sense in a metaphorical movement. Everything is a metaphor as long as it is not reduced to a unity, to one entity with a proper name. Everything is a metaphor before gaining a name. Neither human beings nor their language begins with the unity of proper names. In the beginning is not logos but rather the multiplicity of metaphors, or dissemination. The latter is the original move, the original sin. Having several meanings is just having no meaning. And having infinitely many meanings is the original sin! But history changed this story by saying that everyone and everything has just one thing to say, namely logos. The unity of logos used to stand against the plurality of dissemination. This is the birth of logic and its governance over thinking. Before the governance of logic thinking was vivid, with the multiplication of metaphors as its motor. 3. Conclusion The whole story is about the source of organizations. In a Platonic and Aristotelian view, organizations are pre-established patterns governing the creation of being. Derrida changes the story by claiming that organizations are just the results of the original movement of dissemination which is without any pre-existing organization. Grammar for example is the law of making correct phrases, but the result of an accidental formation of phrases. Grammar would be different if the historical speakers of a language could put the words together in a different way, and they really could, and it is also the case about the formation of a word through putting voices together. Therefore, metaphoricity is the original accident, the original accidental movement that produces concepts and organizations. Human being is an animal who learned to think in the course of history. References - Aristotle (1924) Metaphysics, Translated by W. D. Ross, Oxford: Clarendon Press. - Aristotle (2014) Poetics, Translated by Malcolm Heath, Pinguin Classics, New Edition. - Derrida, J. (1982) “Wight Mythology: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy” in Margins of Philosophy, translated by Alan Bass, The University of Chicago. - Heidegger, M. (1957) Der Satz vom Grund, Pfullingen, Neske 1957. - Louis, Pierre (1945) Les Métaphores de Platon, Paris,‘Les Belles Lettres.

Modification of Aristotle's theory of definition in Avicennian logic

Akbar Faydei; Masoud Omid

Volume 12, Issue 25 , February 2019, , Pages 173-187

https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2019.8010

Abstract

Abstract According to Aristotle, definition is the first step to aquire scientific knowledge. And the full knowledge of objects is possible only by knowing their essence and essential ... Read More Abstract According to Aristotle, definition is the first step to aquire scientific knowledge. And the full knowledge of objects is possible only by knowing their essence and essential definition. Following Aristotle, Avicenna thinks that the full knowledge of things is gained through the knowledge of their essence. Admitting the difficulty of understanding the essentials of objects, he states, based on his essentialist doctrine, that real definition should imply quiddity, truth and perfection of essential existence of the limited object so that it represents all its essence. But man can not identify essentials of objects and true definitions of them. Avicenna describes details of all kinds of definitions, and this article we modifies and completes the rules of Aristotle's theory of definition. In will explain it. Keywords: Essentialism, Real Definitions, Genus and Differentia, Aristotle, Avicenna. 1. Introduction Distinguishing between essential and accidental attributes of objects, Aristotle chooses essentialism as his approach. Avicenna shows interest in Aristotelian essentialism in some of his works, but in other works he claims that kowing the essential features of objects is beyond human epistemic capacity and thus modifies the rules of the Aristotelian definitions. 2. Aristotelian Essentialism about Definition: According to Aristotle, sensitive perception represents the knowledge of particular objects and is not considered an example of scientific knowledge; but these very sensitive observations assist the intellect to discover the hidden universals within particular objects and pave the way for the reason to get access to the specific form of objects and distinguish between their essential and accidental features and succeed in revealing their true nature. Aristotle in his metaphysical discussions distinguishes between real and nominal definitions and declares both of them possible and considers the real definition to be the first step for acquiring the scientific knowledge of objects. According to Aristotle, perfect knowledge of objects can be achieved merely by the knowledge of their nature and essence. Real definition of an object is a statement that expresses its essential features, without mentioning the name of the object itself in the definition. This definition is composed of genus (non-conditioned as a matter) and differentia (non-conditioned as a form), and it is always universal and affirmative. 3. Avicenna's Notion of Definition and His Critisism of Aristotelian Definition: Avicenna's words in Shifa and Isharat, like followers of Aristotle, are focused on the possibility of the knowledge of essential features of objects; in the essay devoted to the issue of definition in his book entitled Nijat, Avicenna endorses the possibility of definition and at the same time highlights the absolute difficulty of definition, including real and nominal definitions. However, in his book entitled Ta'liqat he clearly argues that true definition of objects is out of the reach of man. In his book entitled Mantiq al-Mashriqyyin, he provides a detailed discussion of various types of definition and makes some modifications in Aristotelian rules of definition. In Ta'liqat, Avicenna declares real definition composed of genus and differentia to be impossible and criticizes Aristotle's method as incorrect. He restricts human knowledge of objects to knowing their features, requirements and accidents and denied the possibility of knowing their essential features and real definitions. He claims that the first epistemic means of human being is sense, which touches the superficial aspects of objects; then man distinguishes between identical and different perceptions using his intellectual powers and reason and thus understands some of their attributes and requirements and remains uninformed about others. If man was able to perceive the truth of objects he could be aware of all requirements; then man is not able to know the essence and truth of objects. Moreover, difference of opinions regarding the nature of objects is a sign of human reason's inability to understand essential attributes of objects. Knowledge of the true differentia of compound objects lies beyond the ability of man's intellectual perception and he has access only to their requirements. So, man calls their common requirements as genus while he calls their special requirements differentia and particular accident. For example, thinking is not the true differentia of human being, but rather one of the requirements of his true differentia. Furthermore, simple objects have no genus and differentia so that man could know them by knowing these. For this reason, man does not have any access to the knowledge of the essence of objects. The completely immaterial objects are considered as externally simple and intellectually compound, as accidents. The essence of the completely immaterial entities is simple and lacks any matter or external form. We assume genus and differenia for them and bring these in their essential definition. Genus and differentia are declared to be mental matter and form when these are considered without any condition and in this case, they are parts of real definition, not components of simple entities. So, in fact, neither the essence of compound entities nor the essence of simple entities is accessible to man. 4. Conclusion: Aristotle believes that every object has an essence and definition aims at knowing this very essence. Aristotle's followers contend that true definition is difficult to reach, but many Muslim philosophers in general and Avicenna in particular in some of his works argue that essential attributes of objects lie beyond the limits of human intellect. Reaching the true genus and differentia of objects and knowing their essential features is not possible for man. What is declared to be the differentia of the object is in fact its logical differentia, which is in turn the requirement of true differentia. However, knowledge of some of the essential features and requirements leads to the undetailed knowledge of the truths of objects and their features. The major purpose of the definition is thus achieved and man is delivered from the vortex of doubt and sophistry. References: - Aristotle (1980 AD), Aristotelian logic, Abdul Rahman Badawi’s research, Beirut, Dar al-Qalam, 2,418 - Aristotle (2006 AD), metaphysics, translated by Mohammad Hassan Lotfi, Tehran, Tarh-e-now, 63 - Ibn Sina, Hussein bin Abdullah (1982 AD), Mantiq Al-Mashriqiyin, Shukri al-Najjar’s introduction, Beirut, Dar Al-hedatheh, 59-67 - Ibn Sina (1404 AH), Al-ta’liqat, Abdul Rahman Badawi’s research, Qom, School Al-Alam al-salami, 34

The Paradigmatic Significance of Perception in Mullā Ṣadrā’s Philosophy of Being

Anthony F. Shaker

Volume 12, Issue 24 , October 2018, , Pages 115-143

Abstract

Ṣadrā presents the usefulness of the faculties of perception governed by the intellect as a fitting paradigm for understanding man’s being in the world in relation to the divine ... Read More

The place of psychology according to Aristotle

Ahmad Hosseini

Volume 12, Issue 22 , June 2018, , Pages 29-44

Abstract

A problem concerning Aristotle’s psychology asks where its right place is. Should it be studied in the physics or in metaphysics or some part of it in physics and some other part ... Read More

Aristotle on the Cause of Being and of Coming to Be

Sebastian Weiner

Volume 11, Issue 21 , December 2017, , Pages 217-232

Abstract

This paper considers Aristotle’s distinction between the cause of being and the cause of coming to be. It is intended to show that Aristotle is able to unify both kinds of causes ... Read More

Aristotle and Theory of Decision(Prohairesis)

Majid Mollayousefi; Leila Shirkhani

Volume 11, Issue 20 , August 2017, , Pages 249-264

Abstract

The Problem of Decision is among the most questions in ethical thoughts of Aristotle.The Problem of Decision is among the most questions in ethical thoughts of Aristotle.The Problem ... Read More

Naturalistic explanation of realized dream: Aristotle and Jung

Ali Sanaee; Ali Reza Fazeli

Volume 10, Issue 19 , March 2016, , Pages 207-229

Abstract

The naturalistic explanation of realized dream (or dreams that come true) means that this phenomen will be explained regardless of supernatural agents. Aristotle in Parva naturalia ... Read More

Proposition and contradiction: the definition of proposition in Aristotle's logical works

Seyyed Ammar Kalantar; Mahdi Ghavam Safari

Volume 10, Issue 19 , March 2016, , Pages 327-351

Abstract

Aristotle in his logical works, in addition to statement, introduces the concept of proposition and defines it based on affirmation and negation in Prior Analytics. There are two issues ... Read More

Akrasia according to Socrates and Aristotle

Arvin Azargin; Gholamhossein Tavakoli

Volume 9, Issue 16 , May 2015, , Pages 1-22

Abstract

When an agent acts contrary to his, all-things-considered, best judgment while he is able to do the best he acts akratically. Socrates for the first time posed the problem. He believed ... Read More

The Position of Logic in Aristotle`s Divisions of Sciences

Ahmad Ali Heidari; Mehdi Hatef

Volume 6, Issue 10 , May 2012, , Pages 63-96

Abstract

One of the subject-matters that Aristotle had raised in his works is the division of sciences. He divides sciences, in different positions of his works, into ... Read More

Human Flourishing from the Foot's Viewpoint Regarding to Aristotle's Ideas

Majid Mollayousefi Mollayousefi; Hamideh Aflatooni Aflatooni

Volume 5, Issue 9 , November 2011, , Pages 161-176

Abstract

Aristotle's virtue ethics is a teleological ethics, namely, for him, the purpose of achieving moral virtues by human beings is to obtain eudaimonia. The best interpretation of ... Read More

A Critical Veiw on Copleston's Report of the Platonic Ideas

Majid SadrMajles

Volume 4, Issue 216 , July 2010, , Pages 49-80

Abstract

F. Copleston is an outstanding historian of philosophy and his name associates "A History of Philosophy" including 11 volumes. The work is an academic research. At first volume (Greece ... Read More

Plato’s Distinction between the Idea of Beauty and the Universal Concept of beauty in Symposium

Majid Sadremajles

Volume 2, Issue 203 , September 2008, , Pages 61-83

Abstract

Philosophers and commentators of Plato’s works introduce the Ideas (Forms) as Universals that our knowledge of them is delivered in general definitions. Aristotle is at the beginning ... Read More

Volume 18 (2024)

Volume 17 (2023)

Volume 16 (2022)

Volume 15 (2021)

Volume 14 (2020)

Volume 13 (2019)

Volume 12 (2018)

Volume 11 (2017)

Volume 10 (2016)

Volume 9 (2015)

Volume 8 (2014)

Volume 7 (2013)

Volume 6 (2012)

Volume 5 (2011)

Volume 4 (2010)

Volume 3 (2009)

Volume 2 (2008)

Volume 1 (2007)

Keywords = Aristotle

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract