The causality of the unmoved mover according to Pseudo Alexander
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ef.11622Keywords:
Aristotle, pseudo Alexander, first mover, causalityAbstract
this essay discusses the issue of causality of Aristotle’s first mover. The problem, arisen already with Theophrastus, still constitutes one of most debated issues. The prevailing theory among the ancient commentators and for a long time among the contemporary interpreters, according to which the unmoved mover would move as a final cause, has found now a new possible interpretation, defended by Salis in her paper too, in virtue of which the first mover would produce the movement as an efficient cause. Salis analyzes the interpretation offered by one of the ancient commentators of Aristotle, known as Pseudo Alexander. This commentator, previously considered a Neoplatonist, has been recently identified with Michael of Ephesus, a Byzantine writer of the XI-XIIth centuries. According to Alexander of Aphrodisias, heaven would move in order to become uniform with the first mover, and it would move with a circular movement (the kind of movement that is closer to the absolute immobility of the first cause, of which heaven is an imitation). Pseudo Alexander, Salis suggests, even following the traditional interpretation, builds up an entirely original theory in maintaining that, regarding the problem of the causality of the first mover, he moves away from Alexander and introduces an innovative ingredient: according to him, the first heaven would not tend to imitate the unmoved mover, but would aim at appropriating or joining it.
Downloads
References
ALEXANDRI APHRODISIENSIS. In Aristotelis Metaphysica Commentaria. M. Hayduck (ed.), Berolini, 1891, CAG 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110807677
ALEXANDRI quod fertur in Aristotelis Sophisticos Elenchos Commentarium, M. Wallies (ed.), Berolini, 1898, CAG 2.3.
ARISTÓTELES, Politica, O. Immisch (ed.), Teubner, 1929.
BARKER, E. Social and Political Thought in Byzantium. Oxford, 1957.
BERTI, E. “Ancora sulla causalità del motore immobile”, en: Methexis 20, 2007, pp. 7-28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/24680974-90000515
BERTI, E. “Da chi è amato il motore immobile? Su Aristotele, Metaph. XII 6-7”, en: Aristotele. Dalla dialettica alla filosofia prima. Bompiani, Milano, 2004, pp. 616-650. Publicado originalmente en: Methexis 10, 1997, pp. 59-82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/24680974-90000272
BERTI, E. “Il dibattito odierno sulla cosiddetta “teologia” di Aristotele”, en: Paradigmi, 21, 62, 2003, pp. 279-297.
BERTI, E. “Il libro Lambda della Metafisica di Arisotele. Trafisica e metafisica”, en: Plato und Aristoteles sub ratione veritatis. Festschrift für Wolfgang Wieland zum 70. Geburstag, herausgegeben von Damschen, G., Enskat, R., Vigo, A. G., Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003, pp. 177-193.
BERTI, E. “La causalità naturale del Motore immobile secondo Aristotele”, en: Gregorianum 83, 4, 2002, pp. 637-654.
BERTI, E. “The Unmoved mover as efficient cause in Aristotle’s Metaphysics XII”, en: Pentzopoulou-Valalas, T. - Dimopoulos, S. Aristotle on Metaphysics. Thessaloniki, Aristotle University, 1999, pp. 73-81.
BOUYGES, M. Averroès: Tafsīr ma ba ’d at-tabi’ at. Beirouth, Imprimerie catolique, 1948, III.
BRENTANO, F. La psicologia di Aristotele con particolare riguardo alla sua dottrina del nous poietikos. Trad. it. di B. Maj e R. Sega, a cura di S. Besoli, Bologna, Pitagora, 1989. (Ed. origin.: Die Psychologie des Aristoteles insbesondere seine Lehre vom nous poietikos. Mainz, Kirchheim Verlag, 1867).
BROADIE, S. “Que fait le premier moteur d’Aristote?”, en: Revue philosophique de la France et de l’Etranger 183, 1993, pp. 375-411.
BROWNING, R. “An unpublished funeral oration on Anna Comnena”, en: Sorabji, R. [ed.], Aristotle transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence. London, Duckworth, 1990, pp. 393-406.
DARROUZÈS, J. Georges et Demetrios Tornikes: lettres et discours. Introduction, Texte, Analyses, Traduction et Notes, Paris, 1970.
EUSTRATII et MICHAELIS et Anonyma in Ethica Nicomachea Commentaria, G. Heylbut (ed.), Berolini, CAG 20,1892.
FREUDENTHAL, F. “Die durch Averroes erhaltenen Fragmente Alexanders zur Metaphysik des Aristoteles untersucht und übersetzt”, en: Abhandlungen der koniglichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Berlin, 1884, phil. hist. Kl., No. 1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112505786
GENEQUAND, C. Ibn Rushd’s Metaphysics. A Translation with Introduction of Ibn Rushd’s Commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, Book Lām, Leiden, Brill, 1986. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004451087
GIACON, C. La causalita del motore immobile, Padova, Antenore, 1969.
IOANNIS PHILOPONI (Michaelis Ephesii). In Libros De Generatione Animalium Commentaria, M. Hayduck (ed.), Berolini, CAG 14.3, 1903.
JUDSON, L. “Heavenly Motion and the Unmoved Mover”, en: Gill, M. L. – Lennox, J. G. (eds.), Self-motion. From Aristotle to Newton, Princeton, 1994, pp. 155-171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400887330-011
KOSMAN, A. “Aristotle’s Prime Mover”, en: Gill, M. L. – Lennox, J. G. (eds.). Self-motion. From Aristotle to Newton, Princeton, 1994, pp.135-153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400887330-010
MARTIN, A. Averroes. Grand commentaire de la Metaphysique d’Aristote (Tafsīr ma ba‘d at-tabi‘at). Livre Lam-Lambda traduit de l’arabe et annote, Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1984.
MERCKEN, H. P. F. “The Greek commentators on Aristotle’s Ethics”, en: Sorabji, R. (ed.). Aristotle transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence, London, Duckworth, 1990.
MICHAELIS EPHESII. In Libros De Partibus Animalium, De Animalium Motione, De Animalium Incessu Commentaria, M. Hayduck (ed.), Berolini, 1904, CAG 22.2.
MOVIA, G. (a cura di), Alessandro di Afrodisia. Commentario alla Meta sica di Aristotele, Milano, Bompiani, 2007.
NATALI, C. “Causa motrice e causa finale nel libro Lambda della Meta sica di Aristotele”, en: Methexis 10, 1997, pp. 105-123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/24680974-90000274
PREUS, A. Aristotle and Michael of Ephesus. On the Movement and Progression of Animals, Hildesheim - New York, 1981.
PSEUDO-ALESSANDRO. Commentario agli Elenchi sofistici di Aristotele. Introduzione, traduzione e commento di R. Salis, Leche, Edizioni di Storia della Tradizione aristotelica, 2008.
ROSS, W. D. Aristotle’s Metaphysics. A revised Text with Introduction and Commentary, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1924, Special Edition for Sandpiper Booksa Ltd., 1997.
SALIS, R. Il commento di pseudo-Alessandro al libro Lambda della Metafisica di Aristotele. Soveria Mannelli, Rubbettino, 2005 [2006].
SALIS, R. “La causalità naturale in Aristotele, Phys. II 7, 198 a 35-b 4”, in: Rossitto, C. (a cura di). Studies on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition - Studi su Aristotele e la tradizione aristotelica, Proceedings of the International Conference, Padova, 11-13 dicembre 2006, en prensa.
SALIS, R. “Michele di Efeso e il commento pseudo-alessandrino agli Elenchi sofistici”, en: Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, Classe di scienze morali, lettere ed arti 165, 2006-2007, pp. 371-399.
SCHWEGLER, A. Die Metaphysik des Aristoteles. Grundtext, Übersetzung und Commentare, nebst erläuternden abhandlung, Minerva G.m.b.H. Frankfurt am Main, 1960.
SHARPLES, R. W. Alexander of Aphrodisias: Quaestiones 1.1-2.15. London, Duckworth, 1992.
SHARPLES, R. W. “Aristotelian Theology after Aristotle”, en: Frede, D. - Laks, A. Traditions of Theology. Studies in Hellenistic Theology, its background and aftermath. Leiden, Brill, 2002, pp. 1-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047401063_002
SHARPLES, R. W. “Pseudo-Alexander on Aristotle”, en: Movia, G. (a cura di). Alessandro di Afrodisia e la “Metafisica” di Aristotele. Milano, Vita e pensiero, 2003, pp. 187-218.
ZELLER, E. Die Philosophie der Griechen in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung, 3.1: Die nacharistotelische Philosophie. Hildesheim, G. Olms, 1963.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2009 Rita Salis
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term "Work" shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher a nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoCommercia-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0), or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions: (a) Attribution: Other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;(b) Noncommercial: Other users (including Publisher) may not use this Work for commercial purposes;
4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal;
5. Authors are permitted, and Estudios de Filosofía promotes, to post online the preprint manuscript of the Work in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work is expected be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Estudios de Filosofía's assigned URL to the Article and its final published version in Estudios de Filosofía.
