New answers tagged

1

These terms don't have universally agreed-upon definitions. Syllogism is often associated with Aristotle, in particular with the (restricted) kinds of deductive inferences he described as "perfect" (teleios), but which others subsequently called "syllogisms", although Aristotle himself used ​the latter term in a boarder sense, according ...


0

See Integralism: A Manual of Poilitical Philosophy by Crean, O.P. & Fimister, ch. 8 "Forms of Polity", esp. the sections on "mixed polities", where they —e.g., fn. 25: 158 descriptions of different constitutions are attributed in ancient lists to Aristotle and his school. None survives, except for part of the Constitution of the ...


2

The basis for Aristotle's classification of constitutions is twofold, taking into acccount (1) that government may be exercised for the good of the governed or the good of the governing and (2) that government may be concentrated in one person, a few persons or the many (Politics, III.7). The 'true' forms of constitution (orthai politeiai) are those in which ...


0

Regarding your question: what is the realtionship beteween the substantial form of a bodily being and its act of existing, ie. its esse? It seems that Aquinas says that form produces/gives esse ( "...beacuse form causes existance in act,..."), but how can form give esse if the form already needs to exist in order to give something? From my POV, ...


0

Indeed, "it's a privation, and privations are non-beings and thus cannot be causes". A privation is a principle, not a "per se cause" (causa per se), but a "per accidens cause" (causa per accidens). On the Principles of Nature: […] that primarily from which motion begins cannot really be called a cause, even though it may be ...


2

The short answer is that 'being qua being' translates τὸ ὂν ῃ ὂν Metaphysics Γ 1 1003a21–22. 'Substance' is the standard translation οὐσία (e.g. Categories 4 1b27). Finally, τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι is most commonly rendered 'essence' (e.g., Metaphysics, 1029b 13-14).


0

I like the explanation but I do not like the thing explained. I do not think unemployment causes anything except misery. I think it is a result of other things like the vicissitudes of finance capital. Only particular workers are unemployed, although mathematically they can be summed up (Sigma symbol). Anyway, I'm reading a marxist sociologist's (Arnold ...


0

I'm not sure but we can make it statement by stating that "A and A" is always true


0

change can be interpreted as a process of alternative creations and annihilations of a thing, assuming that change occurs in discrete durations (i.e change is quantized), by which let say a thing A (with a certain properties or accidents ) is created and endure the quantized duration of change, then it annihilates, and then a new thing is created, lets call ...


Top 50 recent answers are included