I meant this more as a grasp of what the word is saying, to our natural consciousness or reason, rather than an etymological inquiry into texts, but only more so, and primarily, I'm not ruling out conceptual and etymological analysis. But favouring existential, phenomenological and proximate common sense understanding.

I was concerned by some questions about the use, not only in Aristotle and the ancients, but in a broader use, of the term "contrary to nature", which is also sent to us, perhaps mainly through Christian texts, as "against nature". This term is para, παρὰ. παρὰ φύσιν.

We all know the notion of a paradox, and it was used, even in antiquity, to name the argument of Zeno concerning always going half way never getting on to the place to which one had set out to go. It strikes me that if one meditates over the paradox, and what is strange in it, how it is a para or weird thing, i.e, contrary or against expectation, a παρὰ δόξαν, 'doxa' means opinion, in such a reflection we can also grasp something of the Greek attitude to "morality", sound or solid knowledge of regularities helpful to human beings (the flight from exposure to blind chance, Fate, and, perhaps, the "paradox"?). That Agathos (soundness, sturdiness, or good) which was no Christian moralism or "good" (rather than evil).

In any case, is there such a study known concerning para? Or does anyone have any ideas about this? It alarms me that modern modulations of this notion are giving it a bad name. Thinking over the world, and not only supposed logical contradictions or paradoxies, is worthily aimed at by the Greeks. The human mind expects a tree of a certain kind to produce lemons, about the edges of its green branches, for instance, and this expectation is someone phusis, nature, in the traditional sense, born out of Aristotle's favored sense of the word, as that which happens when things are not perverted, as they were.

I suppose I am asking if anyone, by nature, has a propensity that will deepen this meditation over the conception of 'para', in this region of connections, such as with the notion of phusis as what comes forth on its own, but can be altered by external force, thus as a kind of autonomy of all things, or inner instinct even of stones. Of course, this is para to modern conceptions of forces of motion, but it is not so strange to ordinary observation.

  • 1
    I have tried but cannot understand the question. Are you using 'para' in an uncommon way? – PeterJ Nov 9 '17 at 14:06
  • "Contrary to" (let alone "to nature") is not the only, and not even the primary, meaning of παρά in Greek, "beside" or "next to" are. It seems to me from the post that the question is not really about the senses of παρά but about natural law morality. The last two paragraphs are problematic: "does anyone have any ideas about this" is off-topic on SE, no matter what "this" is, because it generates opinion-based answers. The last paragraph is in addition deeply obscure. – Conifold Nov 9 '17 at 22:46
  • One might say, the way the word was used. In other words, the reason, not the mere sign. Parrots, though these days some people dispute it, say the word, but what is understood is what one seeks as a thinker. – Gonçalo Mabunda Nov 13 '17 at 1:23
  • See para- and Ancient Greek παρά. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Nov 14 '17 at 13:15
  • I know that. What I'm asking about is not the supposed precise designation or signification as given by the metes and bounds of a classiest. Rather, the derivation based on the way it is used, as thought by someone with common sense. Something more than the mere "notional" sense. Some talent is wanted. – Gonçalo Mabunda Nov 14 '17 at 22:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.