J. L. ACKRILL, Aristotle’s Categories and De Interpretatione. Translated with Notes (Clarendon Aristotle Series). Oxford, Clarendon Press, VII, p. Pr. sh. Aristotle’s Categories is a singularly important work of philosophy. It not only .. Ackrill finds Aristotle’s division of quality at best unmotivated. The Categories is a text from Aristotle’s Organon that enumerates all the possible kinds of Aristotle’s own text in Ackrill’s standard English version is: Of things.
|Published (Last):||25 January 2016|
|PDF File Size:||10.73 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||7.11 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Add all three to Cart Add all three to List. Customers who viewed this item also viewed.
Categories (Aristotle) – Wikipedia
According to this interpretation the constitutive principle of the list of categories is that they constitute those classes of items to each of which any sensible particular — substantial or otherwise — must be related. After providing his first system zckrill classification, Aristotle turns to the predicamenta and presents a second, which ends up occupying him for much of the remainder of the Categories.
According to the grammatical approach, which traces to Trendelenburg and has most recently been defended by Michael BaumerAristotle generated aristot,e list by paying attention to the structures inherent in language. So, for instance, the greater, as suchis said to be of something aristolte, for it is said to be greater than something 6a Aquinas, for instance, says the following about the category in his Summa Theologiae:.
Categories and De Interpretatione
Loux, however, finds a way to salvage the Aristotelian thesis by denying the claim that it is about the meaning or sense of universal terms. The Four-Fold Division 1.
What do the categories classify? When did Aristotle write the Categories? He takes as evidence for his interpretation Aridtotle remarks in Topics I 9. Of things said without any combination, each signifies either substance or quantity or qualification or a relative or where or when or being-in-a-position or having or doing or being-affected. Inspecting all of Aquinas’s derivation to determine its cogency is far too large a project to undertake here.
The lowest species in this taxonomy give way to kinds of increasing generality until the highest kind, substance, is reached. But to know whether our questions are tracking the metaphysical structures of the world requires us to have some way of establishing the correctness of the categorial scheme.
Indeed, it should not be at all surprising that the difficulties that have beset metaphysical speculation in the Western wckrill can be seen in such a stark and provocative fashion in one of the great founding works of that very tradition. Hence, it cannot stand firm as a correct set of categories. Such difficulties understandably lead to questions about the legitimacy of category theory and metaphysical speculation in general. The latter has come to be known as inherence.
After relatives, Aristotle discusses the category of quality. But, as with just about everything in Aristotle’s scheme, the divisions he makes among qualities has been severely criticized.
Hamlyn – – The Classical Review 14 Aristotle’s Two SystemsOxford: Continental Philosophy categorize this paper. That there are highest kinds or perhaps that there is one single highest kind can be motivated by noticing the fact that the ordinary objects of our experience fall into classes of increasing generality.
Such entities, Aristotle says, are primary substances 2a In other words, being would have to be differentiated by some non-being, which, according categkries Aristotle, is a ackrkll absurdity. What then is Aristotle’s second classificatory system? So by examining the details of the predicates in our language, we have some grounds for distinguishing between the category of substance and the accidental categories. The difficulties involved in Aristotle’s list of species in the category of quantity can be made more precise by noting that in several places he seems to commit himself to the view that body is a species in the category of substance Top.
We can then direct the same question at the answer we have given: Witt, University of New Hampshire.
Some have interpreted Aristotle as classifying concepts. Moravcsik – – Melbourne, Macmillan. To be fair, Aristotle’s category of quality has had its defenders. Does it end, in other words, at a highest kind? Any sensible particular, substance, event, sound, etc. There is a rich tradition of commentators including Radulphus Brito, Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, and most recently their modern heir Franz Brentano, who provide precisely the kind of derivation for Aristotle’s categorial scheme found wanting by Kant.
The proposals can be classified into four types, which I shall call: The literal translation is precise but difficult. Ackrill is at University of Oxford. Ackrill, for instance, criticizes Aristotle as follows:. So, in the first instance, we can ask: Aristotle’s De Interpretatione 8 is About Ambiguity. If there are non-substantial particulars, then Socrates’ whiteness is a numerically distinct particular from Plato’s whiteness.
It is indeed hard to see.