The Aristotlelian individual. Between Particularity and Singularity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ef.12782Keywords:
Aristotle, individual, singular, particular, entity, knowledgeAbstract
A revision of the use and implications of the expression in a grest part of the aristotelian work is made. The treatises that make up the Organon have an especial interest in this study, but the ontological, cosmological, ethical, political and biological texts are not left inside. The said formula designares the individual in the Discursive Logic of the Stagirite, but the ways in which it is understood are not completely congruent; therefore there is a change from a singularism, that entails a unique and irreplaceable identity, and therefore unknowable for a part of science, to a particularism, this is, a vislon from an universalist perspective that converts Individuals in participants of common conditions, with which the cognitive problems are solved, even though the Potency of Individuation, which could be in its pretended singularity, is left suspended. A fundamental pretense of this paper is to show how in Aristotelianism there is a strong universalist tendency as a formula to solve the apories that arise from individuation, and that therefore it is Formalism, which no doub arouse from Platonism which is to define the modes par excellence of access lo the real tangible.
Downloads
References
Aristotelis. Analytica priora et posteriora. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1964 (ed. Ross). Versión española en Gredos, Madrid, 1988 (traductor Candel Sanmartín). Versión inglesa en: Great Books of the Western World. Trad. Jenkinson. London, Encyclopaedia Británica, 1952.
____________. De anima. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1961.
____________. Acerca del alma. Trad. T. Calvo. Madrid, Gredos, 2000.
____________. Categorice et liber de interpretatione. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1966.
____________ De cáelo. Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1965.
____________ . De generatione animalium. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1972.
____________ . De generatione et corruptione. Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1966.
____________ . De partibus animalium. Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1966. Versión inglesa por Ogle (Great Books...).
____________ . Ethica eudemia. Amsterdam, Hakkert, 1967.
____________ . Ethica nicomachea. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1962.
____________ . Historia animalium. Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1969.
____________ . Magna moralia. Cambridge, Harvard, 1969.
____________ . Metaphysica. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1970 (1924 y 1953).
____________ . Metafísica. Trad. T. Calvo. Gredos, Madrid, 2000;
____________ . Metafísica. Trad. A. García Y. Madrid, Gredos, 1996
Versión italiana de Reale, con un ensayo introductorio y comentario, en tres tomos, Vita e Pensiero, Milán, 1995.
____________ . Meteorologicorum libri quatuor. Cambridge, Harvard, 1967.
____________ . Parva naturalia. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1970.
____________ . Physica. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1966.
____________ . Física. Trad. G R. de Echandía. Madrid, Gredos, 1995
____________ . Física. Trad. J. L. Calvo. Madrid, CSIC, 1996.
____________ . Política. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1964.
____________ . Rhetorica. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1964.
____________ . Tópica et sophistici elenchi. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1970.
____________ . Tópicos y refutaciones sofisticas. Trad. Candel S., Gredos, Madrid, 1982.
Caspar, Philippe. “Le probleme de l’individu chez Aristote”, Revue Philosophique de Louvain, 84, 1986, pp. 173-186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2143/RPL.84.2.2013584
Düring, ¡.Aristóteles. México, UNAM, 1990.
Fallas, L. “Presencia y comprensión del tovde ti en el Organon de Aristóteles”, Hypnos 10(13), 2005, pp. 25-37.
Guthrie, W. K. C. Historia de la filosofía griega. Vol. VI. Madrid, Gredos, 1984- 1993.
G. B. Mattews; S. M. Cohen. “The one and many”, Review o f Metaphysics 21 (4), 1968, pp. 637—655.
Gail Fine. “Relational entities”, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 65, 1983, pp. 225-249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/agph.1983.65.3.225
Inciarte, Femando. “La identidad del sujeto individual según Aristóteles”, Anuario Filosófico, 26 (2),1993, pp. 289-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15581/009.26.29919
Jaeger, W. Aristóteles. México, Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1995 (1923).
Joja, Athanase. “Katholou et kath’ hekasto chez Aristotle”, Philosophie et Logique, 16, 1972, pp. 43-57.
Jones, Barrington. “Individuals in Aristotle’s Categories”, Phronesis, 17,1972, pp. 107-123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/156852872X00132
Lear, J. Aristóteles. El deseo de comprender. Madrid, Alianza, 1994.
W. Leszl, “Knowledge of the universal and knowledge of the particular in Aristotle”, The Review of Metaphysics XXVI, 2 (102), dec., 1972, pp. 278-313.
Mulhem, J. J. Teorema. 5 (2), Universidad de Valencia, 1975, pp. 277-286. McPherran, M. “Plato’s particulars”, Southern Journal o f Philosophy XXVI, 4, 1988, pp. 527-553 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-6962.1988.tb02163.x
Nussbaum, M. La fragilidad del bien. Madrid, Visor, 1995 [1986].
Owen, G E. L. Logic, Science, and Dialectic. Cornell, Ithaca, 1986, pp. 192-3.
Raju, P. T. “The nature o f the individual”. Review of Metaphysics, 17, 1963, pp. 33-48.
White, F. C., “Plato’s middle dialogues and the independence of particulars”. The Philosophical Quarterly, 27 (108), 1977, pp. 193-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2218779
Yu, Jiyuan, “'Tode Ti’ and ‘Toionde’ in Metaphysics Z”, Philosophical Inquiry, 16(3-4), 1994, pp. 1-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/philinquiry1994163/46
Zagal, H. Retórica, inducción y ciencia en Aristóteles. México, Universidad Panamericana, 1993.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2006 Luis Fernando Fallas López
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.
