Podcasts about aristotelians

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 20th and 21st century philosopher and moral theorist, Alasdair MacIntyre's essay "Plain Persons and Moral Theory" It focuses upon his contention that plain persons are often what he calls "proto-Aristotelians" in their broad commitments embodying moral theory, rather than simply neutral blank slates. MacIntyre writes: "[T]he plain person is funda­mentally a proto-Aristotelian. What is the force of 'fundamentally 'here? What it conveys can be expressed in three claims, first that every human being either lives out her or his life in a narrative form which is structured in terms of a telos, of virtues and of rules in an Aristotelian mode or has disrupted that narrative by committing her or himself to some other way of life, which is best understood as an alternative designed to avoid or escape from an Aristotelian mode of life, so that the lives of those who understand themselves, explicitly or much more probably implicitly, in terms set by Kant or Reid or Sidgwick or Sartre, are still informed by this rejected alternative. Secondly, I have told the story of the decline and fall of the plain person as the narrative of a single life. But the story could have been told, and I have told it elsewhere (in After Virtue), as a claim about the narrative history of a set of successive periods in West.em culture from the sixteenth to the twentieth century. This partial mirroring of the fate of individuals in the history of the larger social order and of the fate of that larger order in the narratives of individual lives testifies to the inseparability of the two stories. Thirdly, as these first two claims imply, I am also committed to holding that every human being is potentially a fully-fledged and not merely a proto-Aristotelian and that the frustration of that potentiality is among his or her morally important characteristics. We should therefore expect to find, within those who have not been allowed to develop, or have not themselves allowed their lives to develop, an Aristotelian form, a crucial and ineliminable tension between that in them which is and that which is not, Aristotelian. The standard modem anti-Aristotelian self will be a particular kind of divided self, exhibiting that complexity so characteristic of and so prized by modernity." To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,000 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can find MacIntyre's essay "Plain Persons and Moral Theory" here - https://amzn.to/3KUbXVf

fWotD Episode 2559: The Structure of Literature Welcome to featured Wiki of the Day where we read the summary of the featured Wikipedia article every day.The featured article for Tuesday, 7 May 2024 is The Structure of Literature.The Structure of Literature is a 1954 book of literary criticism by Paul Goodman, the published version of his doctoral dissertation in the humanities. The book proposes a mode of formal literary analysis that Goodman calls "inductive formal analysis": Goodman defines a formal structure within an isolated literary work, finds how parts of the work interact with each other to form a whole, and uses those definitions to study other works. Goodman analyzes multiple literary works as examples with close reading and genre discussion.The main points of Goodman's dissertation were made in a 1934 article on aesthetics by the author, who studied with the philosopher Richard McKeon and other neo-Aristotelians at the University of Chicago. Goodman finished his dissertation in 1940, but it was only published in 1954 by the University of Chicago Press at McKeon's behest. Reviews aggregated in Book Review Digest were mixed. Critics described the book as falling short of its aims, with engaging psychological insight and incisive asides mired in glaring style issues and jargon that made passages impenetrable or obscured his argument. Though Goodman contributed to the development of what became known as the University of Chicago's Chicago School of Aristotelian formal literary criticism, he neither received wide academic recognition for his dissertation nor was his method accepted by his field.This recording reflects the Wikipedia text as of 00:30 UTC on Tuesday, 7 May 2024.For the full current version of the article, see The Structure of Literature on Wikipedia.This podcast uses content from Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.Visit our archives at wikioftheday.com and subscribe to stay updated on new episodes.Follow us on Mastodon at @wikioftheday@masto.ai.Also check out Curmudgeon's Corner, a current events podcast.Until next time, I'm Geraint Standard.

Dear listeners, this season has been riveting, and it's been a little controversial. Some of you have written in (if you listen to this episode, you'll see we've graced certain aggrieved parties with a response). We see you, we hear you, and boy, do we have a classic legal theory podcast for you. Today's guest is Kunal Parker, Professor and Dean's Distinguished Scholar at the University of Miami School of Law, here to talk about his fabulous new book The Turn to Process: American Legal, Political, and Economic Thought, 1870–1970. If you liked his first book–and if you didn't, you're probably a wretched anti-foundationalist–you'll love this spiritual sequel.  We begin by asking Parker to lay out his thesis, which is, surprise, surprise, that there was a turn from substance to process in economic, political, and most saliently for us, legal thought in the twentieth century. Next, we discuss how much the phenomenon Parker describes is its own thing versus concomitant with American pragmatism and the disciplinification of the modern research university. We make sure everything gets filtered through big important legal thinkers–Holmes and Fortas, Frankfurter and Bickel–before turning to today's neo-formalistic approaches to the law: neo-Aristotelians, the new private law theorists, et al. (and if we've missed anyone, we can guarantee that our listeners will let us know). This podcast is generously supported by Themis Bar Review. Referenced Readings “Radical Mismatch” by Stephen Holmes Rules for the Direction of the Mind by René Descartes “Mr. Justice Black and the Living Constitution” by Charles Reich Tocqueville's Nightmare: The Administrative State Emerges in America, 1900-1940 by Daniel Ernst On Democracy by Robert Dahl The Public and its Problems by John Dewey Age of Fracture by Daniel Rodgers

The first of a six episode arc on the Early Enlightenment.  We emphasize the clash of ideas, then the content of ideas, then biography.This episode lays out the 3 way battle for the dominant philosophy between the  Aristotelian Scholastics, the dominate group in 1600, the moderate Enlightenment (which itself consisted of 3 battling elements, Cartesians, Newtonians and Leibnizians) and the Radical Enlightenment whose chief philosophical source was Spinoza.We lay out key beliefs of the traditional Aristotelians, their method and then the beliefs of the Cartesians.  3 episodes on Spinoza will follow and one each on Leibniz and Newton to finish.

In this talk, after a quick look at the life of Aristotle and his establishment of a philosophical school at the Lyceum, Dr. Mayhew will describe the grounds and buildings of the Lyceum, its use as a school of philosophy, and the possible reasons for its steady decline as a cultural influence in the centuries following Aristotle's death. A brief account of some of the Aristotelians who came after him (e.g. Theophrastus and Eudemus) will be included. Recorded live at Ayn Rand Con Europe 2023

This talk was given on Feburary 18th 2023, at the Dominican House of Studies in Washington, D.C. For more information please visit thomisticinstitute.org. About the author: Dr. Sarah Byers is a professor of philosophy at Boston College. Aside from specializing in Augustine, she has also published on Rene Descartes. She received her Ph.D. from the University of Toronto.

We will see who the anti-Aristotelians are and that they are anti-life and anti-happiness. Thus they are responsible for these tragedies across the past 2500 years. Do you want to be motivated by Love, or motivated by Fear. Listen and decide. Call-to-Action: After you have listened to this episode, add your $0.02 (two cents) to the conversation, by joining (for free) https://secular-foxhole.haaartland.com/ (The Secular Foxhole Town Hall). Feel free to introduce yourself to the other members, discuss the different episodes, give us constructive feedback, or check out the virtual room, Speakers' Corner, and step up on the digital soapbox. Welcome to our new place in cyberspace! Show notes with links to articles, blog posts, products and services: https://the-secular-foxhole.captivate.fm/episode/andy-clarkson-on-exalted-moments (Andy Clarkson on Exalted Moments) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeoGqmWTaRTKLitJAUA8sQA (The Six-Point Pattern Of The Anti-Aristotelians) https://www.amazon.com/Impact-Aristotle-Christian-Islamic-Cultures/dp/154123765X/ (The Impact Of Aristotle Upon Christian, Islamic, and Jewish Cultures) (book) https://www.facebook.com/groups/134367963254180 (The Impact Of Aristotle Upon Christian, Islamic, and Jewish Cultures )(Facebook) https://the-secular-foxhole.captivate.fm/episode/dont-bite-into-the-jordan-peterson-marshmallow (Don't Bite Into the Jordan Peterson Marshmallow) https://the-secular-foxhole.captivate.fm/episode/back-to-the-dark-ages-with-dennis-prager (Back to the Dark Ages with Dennis Prager) http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/aristotle.html (Ayn Rand Lexicon: Aristotle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haskalah (Haskalah) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Judaism (Reform Movement in Israel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_Rock (Plymouth Rock) https://alexepstein.com/fossilfuture (Fossil Future by Alex Epstein) https://twitter.com/1JakeHider (Jake Hider) https://fountain.fm (Fountain app) https://fountain.fm/secularfoxhole (Blair on Fountain) https://fountain.fm/lyceum (Martin on Fountain) Episode 53 (39 minutes) was recorded at 10 PM CET, on July 30, 2022, with https://ringr.com/ego (Ringr app).. Editing and post-production was done with the https://alitu.com/?fp_ref=egonetcast (podcast maker, Alitu).  https://the-secular-foxhole.captivate.fm/listen (Easy listen to The Secular Foxhole podcast) in your https://podnews.net/podcast/i9d1q/all (podcast (podcatcher) app) of choice, e.g., https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-secular-foxhole/id1529242825 (Apple Podcasts), https://open.spotify.com/show/2OZNzkrzItT4zmDpc8TdqO (Spotify), https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5jYXB0aXZhdGUuZm0vdGhlLXNlY3VsYXItZm94aG9sZS8?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwif28Kq4IjsAhVK0IUKHbQpAREQ4aUDegQIARAC&hl=sv (Google Podcasts), https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/36c65af3-3a05-48fc-90b2-a60bc245d918/the-secular-foxhole (Amazon Music), https://gaana.com/podcast/the-secular-foxhole-season-1 (Gaana), https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/the-secular-foxhole-blair-schofield-and-0AFTLgs42OW/ (Listen Notes), or one of the http://newpodcastapps.com/ (new podcast apps), onhttps://podcastindex.org/podcast/1064830 ( Podcast Index), supporting the https://medium.com/@everywheretrip/an-introduction-to-podcasting-2-0-3c4f61ea17f4 (Podcasting 2.0) initiative, and http://value4value.io/ (Value for Value) by streaming https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/satoshi.asp (Satoshis) (Bitcoin payments). Oscar Merry is ahead of the game, with his https://podcastbusinessjournal.com/app-making-bitcoin-payments-easier/ (Fountain app). Make a https://www.fountain.fm/blog/how-to-top-up-your-fountain-wallet-with-bitcoin (micropayment transaction) with the new https://play.fountain.fm/show/tAMgIwWrYj20GkK7x48m (podcast app, Fountain). You could also listen to our podcast on our own...

This lecture discusses key ideas from the early medieval philosopher and theologian, Augustine of Hippo's work, The City of God. It focuses specifically on his discussion in book 19 bearing on whether the virtues - prudence, justice, courage, and temperance - are the supreme good for human beings or whether they are instead something that can lead us towards the supreme good and happiness. In examining this, Augustine is criticizing ancient pagan virtue ethics, in particular those of the Stoics, but also those of Aristotelians and Platonists. One of his main arguments is that, in this life, virtues carry out a perpetual war with their opposed vices, and that they do so within us. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 1500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler Purchase Augustine's City of God - amzn.to/2GJGM0s

Today we speak with Eva Del Soldato about her new book on how the authority of Aristotle was reinscribed and challenged during the early modern period. In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle affirms that despite his friendship with Plato, he was a better friend of the truth. With this statement, he rejected his teacher's authority, implying that the pursuit of philosophy does not entail any such obedience. Yet over the centuries Aristotle himself became the authority par excellence in the Western world, and even notorious anti-Aristotelians such as Galileo Galilei preferred to keep him as a friend rather than to contradict him openly.  In Early Modern Aristotle: On the Making and Unmaking of Authority (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020), Eva Del Soldato contends that because the authority of Aristotle—like that of any other ancient, including Plato—was a construct, it could be tailored and customized to serve agendas that were often in direct contrast to one another, at times even in open conflict with the very tenets of Peripatetic philosophy. Gerry Milligan is Professor of Italian at the College of Staten Island, where he serves as Director of Honors. He is Professor in Italian and Global Early Modern Studies at the CUNY Graduate Center. His NBN interview is available at here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today we speak with Eva Del Soldato about her new book on how the authority of Aristotle was reinscribed and challenged during the early modern period. In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle affirms that despite his friendship with Plato, he was a better friend of the truth. With this statement, he rejected his teacher's authority, implying that the pursuit of philosophy does not entail any such obedience. Yet over the centuries Aristotle himself became the authority par excellence in the Western world, and even notorious anti-Aristotelians such as Galileo Galilei preferred to keep him as a friend rather than to contradict him openly.  In Early Modern Aristotle: On the Making and Unmaking of Authority (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020), Eva Del Soldato contends that because the authority of Aristotle—like that of any other ancient, including Plato—was a construct, it could be tailored and customized to serve agendas that were often in direct contrast to one another, at times even in open conflict with the very tenets of Peripatetic philosophy. Gerry Milligan is Professor of Italian at the College of Staten Island, where he serves as Director of Honors. He is Professor in Italian and Global Early Modern Studies at the CUNY Graduate Center. His NBN interview is available at here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Today we speak with Eva Del Soldato about her new book on how the authority of Aristotle was reinscribed and challenged during the early modern period. In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle affirms that despite his friendship with Plato, he was a better friend of the truth. With this statement, he rejected his teacher's authority, implying that the pursuit of philosophy does not entail any such obedience. Yet over the centuries Aristotle himself became the authority par excellence in the Western world, and even notorious anti-Aristotelians such as Galileo Galilei preferred to keep him as a friend rather than to contradict him openly.  In Early Modern Aristotle: On the Making and Unmaking of Authority (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020), Eva Del Soldato contends that because the authority of Aristotle—like that of any other ancient, including Plato—was a construct, it could be tailored and customized to serve agendas that were often in direct contrast to one another, at times even in open conflict with the very tenets of Peripatetic philosophy. Gerry Milligan is Professor of Italian at the College of Staten Island, where he serves as Director of Honors. He is Professor in Italian and Global Early Modern Studies at the CUNY Graduate Center. His NBN interview is available at here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/italian-studies

Today we speak with Eva Del Soldato about her new book on how the authority of Aristotle was reinscribed and challenged during the early modern period. In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle affirms that despite his friendship with Plato, he was a better friend of the truth. With this statement, he rejected his teacher's authority, implying that the pursuit of philosophy does not entail any such obedience. Yet over the centuries Aristotle himself became the authority par excellence in the Western world, and even notorious anti-Aristotelians such as Galileo Galilei preferred to keep him as a friend rather than to contradict him openly.  In Early Modern Aristotle: On the Making and Unmaking of Authority (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020), Eva Del Soldato contends that because the authority of Aristotle—like that of any other ancient, including Plato—was a construct, it could be tailored and customized to serve agendas that were often in direct contrast to one another, at times even in open conflict with the very tenets of Peripatetic philosophy. Gerry Milligan is Professor of Italian at the College of Staten Island, where he serves as Director of Honors. He is Professor in Italian and Global Early Modern Studies at the CUNY Graduate Center. His NBN interview is available at here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Today we speak with Eva Del Soldato about her new book on how the authority of Aristotle was reinscribed and challenged during the early modern period. In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle affirms that despite his friendship with Plato, he was a better friend of the truth. With this statement, he rejected his teacher's authority, implying that the pursuit of philosophy does not entail any such obedience. Yet over the centuries Aristotle himself became the authority par excellence in the Western world, and even notorious anti-Aristotelians such as Galileo Galilei preferred to keep him as a friend rather than to contradict him openly.  In Early Modern Aristotle: On the Making and Unmaking of Authority (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020), Eva Del Soldato contends that because the authority of Aristotle—like that of any other ancient, including Plato—was a construct, it could be tailored and customized to serve agendas that were often in direct contrast to one another, at times even in open conflict with the very tenets of Peripatetic philosophy. Gerry Milligan is Professor of Italian at the College of Staten Island, where he serves as Director of Honors. He is Professor in Italian and Global Early Modern Studies at the CUNY Graduate Center. His NBN interview is available at here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

“Bertrand Russell, the famous British philosopher, once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said, “What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise.” The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, “What is the tortoise standing on?” “You're very clever, young man, very clever,” said the old lady. “But it's turtles all the way down! Two millennia ago, while the Stoics, and the Platonists, and the Aristotelians were holding forth about the motions of the planets and the stars and the observable universe, in the back of the room, a little old man stands up, and clears his throat, and says something so preposterous you’d hardly believe it: it’s love all the way down.”

In this thirty-third episode of the Wisdom for Life radio show, hosts Dan Hayes and Greg Sadler engage in a wide-ranging discussion centered on what living a meaningful life is, what the challenges, obstacles, or misunderstandings that stand in the way can be, and useful perspectives and practices for keeping, finding, or developing meaning on one's life.  Some of the approaches and thinkers they discuss include Existentialists like Simone de Beauvoir, Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, and Friedrich Nietzsche; Stoics like Seneca and Epictetus; Cynics and Minimalists; and Aristotle and Aristotelians. Jean Paul Sartre's No Exit (with Lucy Lawless) - https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2014/01/02/sartres-no-exit-read-with-lucy-lawless-jaime-murray/   Why It's Good To Give - https://wisdomforlife.podbean.com/e/why-its-good-to-give/   Show Music is by Scott Tarulli - https://www.scotttarulli.com/

In this thirty-third episode of the Wisdom for Life radio show, hosts Dan Hayes and Greg Sadler engage in a wide-ranging discussion centered on what living a meaningful life is, what the challenges, obstacles, or misunderstandings that stand in the way can be, and useful perspectives and practices for keeping, finding, or developing meaning on one's life.  Some of the approaches and thinkers they discuss include Existentialists like Simone de Beauvoir, Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, and Friedrich Nietzsche; Stoics like Seneca and Epictetus; Cynics and Minimalists; and Aristotle and Aristotelians. Jean Paul Sartre's No Exit (with Lucy Lawless) - https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2014/01/02/sartres-no-exit-read-with-lucy-lawless-jaime-murray/   Why It's Good To Give - https://wisdomforlife.podbean.com/e/why-its-good-to-give/   Show Music is by Scott Tarulli - https://www.scotttarulli.com/

I’m joined this week by Dr. Robert Koons, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. We discuss the central question of the Aquinas Lecture he gave at UD in January: “Is St. Thomas’s Aristotelian Philosophy of Nature Obsolete?” In our conversation, we speak about the relationship between the scientific revolution and Aristotle’s understanding of nature, what philosophers mean by hylomorphism, and why, according to Dr. Koons, all natural scientists, whether they’ve read any Aristotle or not, are at least implicitly Aristotelian. ********** Free video series: The Person: Action and Influence: https://www.catholicfaithandculture.udallas.edu/landing-the-person-action-influence Liberal Learning for Life @ University of Dallas: https://udallas.edu/liberal-learning/​ Twitter: https://twitter.com/lib_learning_ud​ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/liberallearningforlife/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/liberallearningforlife

Much of the wisdom that our society today has inherited from ancient Greece draws on the writings and ideas of its two greatest philosophers, Plato and Aristotle. Though contemporaries - Aristotle was Plato's student - these two giants of Western Thought had radically different views of nature and the human condition, what constitutes a good society and the purposes to which we should direct our individual lives. Two millennia later can we now discern which thinker has had the greatest impact on our civilization? And, considering the daunting future humankind faces - from climate change to the rise of thinking machines to genetic manipulation of our bodies - which of these philosophers' ideas best speak to our present-day reality? Supporters of Plato say that he more than any other thinker articulated the fundamental questions that have guided ethics and politics ever since. He influenced Christianity with his belief in a separate metaphysical reality, and the Enlightenment with his view that the role of a philosopher is to oppose superstition and articulate unpopular truths. Aristotelians argue that secular, science-based societies of the Western world owe an immense debt to Aristotle's exploration and exaltation of reason, logic, and an empirical approach to understanding the world around us. Equally important, he was one of the first philosophers to engage in a systematic inquiry into the nature of human happiness. His prescriptions for how to lead a good life have profound connections to our search for personal and collective meaning in the modern world. Arguing for the motion is Clifford Orwin, Professor of Political Science, Classics, and Jewish Studies at the University of Toronto. He's the founding Senior Fellow at the Bochum Thucydides Center, in Bochum Germany and the author of The Humanity of Thucydides. Arguing against the motion is Edith Hall, Professor of Classics at King's College, in London, England. She is the recipient of the 2015 Erasmus Prize and author of Aristotle's Way, How Ancient Wisdom Can Change Your Life Sources: BBC, Adam MacLeod, Fox News, Biola University The host of the Munk Debates is Rudyard Griffiths - @rudyardg.   Tweet your comments about this episode to @munkdebate or comment on our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/munkdebates/ To sign up for a weekly email reminder for this podcast, send an email to podcast@munkdebates.com.   To support civil and substantive debate on the big questions of the day, consider becoming a Munk Member at https://munkdebates.com/membership Members receive access to our 10+ year library of great debates in HD video, a free Munk Debates book, newsletter and ticketing privileges at our live events. This podcast is a project of the Munk Debates, a Canadian charitable organization dedicated to fostering civil and substantive public dialogue - https://munkdebates.com/ The Munk Debates podcast is produced by Antica, Canada's largest private audio production company - https://www.anticaproductions.com/   Executive Producer: Stuart Coxe, CEO Antica Productions Senior Producer: Christina Campbell Editor: Kieran Lynch Associate Producer: Abhi Raheja

We muse on two articles listed just below and try to think through the problem of anger in politics and in personal life. Does anger corrupt? Is it clarifying? A useful political catalyst or liability? What do we do now that anger is fully commoditized in the digital media sphere in which we live? We stake out our turf as semi-Aristotelians and make our way through these questions and conclude by deciding to do a reading series on After Virtue by Alisdair McIntyre this year. There are the pieces we read. Grin and Bear It (https://thebaffler.com/latest/grin-and-bear-it-obrien)by Hettie O'Brien The Philosophy of Anger (http://bostonreview.net/forum/agnes-callard-philosophy-anger) by Agnes Callard Follow us on Twitter (https://twitter.com/ex_haustpodcast). Closing song: "Roach Blunt (https://violentlyhigh.bandcamp.com/)" by Violently High Our appearance on You Can't Win (https://youcantwin.info/episode-092-christopher-lasch-ft-exhaust-john-and-emmet). Cover image: Photo by Flavio Gasperini on Unsplash. Bibliography (https://exhaust.fireside.fm/articles/eptwentyonebib).

Cicero explains how Aristotelians and Stoics treat externals, such as health, wealth, and so on. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/stoicmeditations/support

Michael, Erick and Dru discuss various Thomistic questions with Zachary Robert. Questions include: 1. How do Catholics avoid a modal collapse.? 2. Is God constrained to create if there is no real distinction between his essence and his will. 3. How do Aristotelians account for modern physics in light of Aristotle’s notion of act/potency? Zachary’s […]

Externals — such as money, possessions, and the like — are how we exercise our virtue, which cannot be expressed in a vacuum. And one of the four cardinal virtues is temperance. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/stoicmeditations/support

One of the major differences between Stoics and Aristotelians has always been the treatment of disruptive emotions, such as anger and fear. They are helpful, in small measure, for Aristotle, but definitely to avoid for the Stoics. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/stoicmeditations/support

Did Siger of Brabant and Boethius of Dacia, who have been called “Latin Averroists” and “radical Aristotelians,” really embrace a doctrine of “double truth”?

Craig Martin‘s new book carefully traces religious arguments for and against Aristotelianism from the eleventh through the eighteenth centuries. Based on a close reading of a staggering array of primary sources, Subverting Aristotle: Religion, History, and Philosophy in Early Modern Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014) in turn subverts several assumptions about the connection between Aristotelian thought and the emergence of the new sciences in early modernity. The book argues that we ought to understand the seventeenth century decline of Aristotle and Aristotelians as an authority in natural philosophy in its relation to the contemporaneous religious readings of Aristotelian texts. In a series of chapters that each look carefully at a particular temporal and philosophical context of debate over the readings of Aristotle, Averroes, and their interlocutors by various religious communities, Martin's book offers a compelling and deeply textured account of arguments over the piety, language, translation, and other aspects of the Aristotelian corpus. This is a book that beautifully shows the interrelationships of the histories of science and religion, while taking readings on a journey through the philosophical corpora of some of the most foundational thinkers on the nature of the cosmos and the soul; through transformations in the craft of historical analysis; and through an important period when translation (and debates about it) helped shape the intellectual histories of the medieval and early modern worlds. It is a fascinating book, and an especially important study for anyone interested in the history of early modern science and/or the relationships between the early histories of science and religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Craig Martin‘s new book carefully traces religious arguments for and against Aristotelianism from the eleventh through the eighteenth centuries. Based on a close reading of a staggering array of primary sources, Subverting Aristotle: Religion, History, and Philosophy in Early Modern Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014) in turn subverts several assumptions about the connection between Aristotelian thought and the emergence of the new sciences in early modernity. The book argues that we ought to understand the seventeenth century decline of Aristotle and Aristotelians as an authority in natural philosophy in its relation to the contemporaneous religious readings of Aristotelian texts. In a series of chapters that each look carefully at a particular temporal and philosophical context of debate over the readings of Aristotle, Averroes, and their interlocutors by various religious communities, Martin's book offers a compelling and deeply textured account of arguments over the piety, language, translation, and other aspects of the Aristotelian corpus. This is a book that beautifully shows the interrelationships of the histories of science and religion, while taking readings on a journey through the philosophical corpora of some of the most foundational thinkers on the nature of the cosmos and the soul; through transformations in the craft of historical analysis; and through an important period when translation (and debates about it) helped shape the intellectual histories of the medieval and early modern worlds. It is a fascinating book, and an especially important study for anyone interested in the history of early modern science and/or the relationships between the early histories of science and religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Craig Martin‘s new book carefully traces religious arguments for and against Aristotelianism from the eleventh through the eighteenth centuries. Based on a close reading of a staggering array of primary sources, Subverting Aristotle: Religion, History, and Philosophy in Early Modern Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014) in turn subverts several assumptions about the connection between Aristotelian thought and the emergence of the new sciences in early modernity. The book argues that we ought to understand the seventeenth century decline of Aristotle and Aristotelians as an authority in natural philosophy in its relation to the contemporaneous religious readings of Aristotelian texts. In a series of chapters that each look carefully at a particular temporal and philosophical context of debate over the readings of Aristotle, Averroes, and their interlocutors by various religious communities, Martin’s book offers a compelling and deeply textured account of arguments over the piety, language, translation, and other aspects of the Aristotelian corpus. This is a book that beautifully shows the interrelationships of the histories of science and religion, while taking readings on a journey through the philosophical corpora of some of the most foundational thinkers on the nature of the cosmos and the soul; through transformations in the craft of historical analysis; and through an important period when translation (and debates about it) helped shape the intellectual histories of the medieval and early modern worlds. It is a fascinating book, and an especially important study for anyone interested in the history of early modern science and/or the relationships between the early histories of science and religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Craig Martin‘s new book carefully traces religious arguments for and against Aristotelianism from the eleventh through the eighteenth centuries. Based on a close reading of a staggering array of primary sources, Subverting Aristotle: Religion, History, and Philosophy in Early Modern Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014) in turn subverts several assumptions about the connection between Aristotelian thought and the emergence of the new sciences in early modernity. The book argues that we ought to understand the seventeenth century decline of Aristotle and Aristotelians as an authority in natural philosophy in its relation to the contemporaneous religious readings of Aristotelian texts. In a series of chapters that each look carefully at a particular temporal and philosophical context of debate over the readings of Aristotle, Averroes, and their interlocutors by various religious communities, Martin’s book offers a compelling and deeply textured account of arguments over the piety, language, translation, and other aspects of the Aristotelian corpus. This is a book that beautifully shows the interrelationships of the histories of science and religion, while taking readings on a journey through the philosophical corpora of some of the most foundational thinkers on the nature of the cosmos and the soul; through transformations in the craft of historical analysis; and through an important period when translation (and debates about it) helped shape the intellectual histories of the medieval and early modern worlds. It is a fascinating book, and an especially important study for anyone interested in the history of early modern science and/or the relationships between the early histories of science and religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Craig Martin‘s new book carefully traces religious arguments for and against Aristotelianism from the eleventh through the eighteenth centuries. Based on a close reading of a staggering array of primary sources, Subverting Aristotle: Religion, History, and Philosophy in Early Modern Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014) in turn subverts several assumptions about the connection between Aristotelian thought and the emergence of the new sciences in early modernity. The book argues that we ought to understand the seventeenth century decline of Aristotle and Aristotelians as an authority in natural philosophy in its relation to the contemporaneous religious readings of Aristotelian texts. In a series of chapters that each look carefully at a particular temporal and philosophical context of debate over the readings of Aristotle, Averroes, and their interlocutors by various religious communities, Martin’s book offers a compelling and deeply textured account of arguments over the piety, language, translation, and other aspects of the Aristotelian corpus. This is a book that beautifully shows the interrelationships of the histories of science and religion, while taking readings on a journey through the philosophical corpora of some of the most foundational thinkers on the nature of the cosmos and the soul; through transformations in the craft of historical analysis; and through an important period when translation (and debates about it) helped shape the intellectual histories of the medieval and early modern worlds. It is a fascinating book, and an especially important study for anyone interested in the history of early modern science and/or the relationships between the early histories of science and religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Craig Martin‘s new book carefully traces religious arguments for and against Aristotelianism from the eleventh through the eighteenth centuries. Based on a close reading of a staggering array of primary sources, Subverting Aristotle: Religion, History, and Philosophy in Early Modern Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014) in turn subverts several assumptions about the connection between Aristotelian thought and the emergence of the new sciences in early modernity. The book argues that we ought to understand the seventeenth century decline of Aristotle and Aristotelians as an authority in natural philosophy in its relation to the contemporaneous religious readings of Aristotelian texts. In a series of chapters that each look carefully at a particular temporal and philosophical context of debate over the readings of Aristotle, Averroes, and their interlocutors by various religious communities, Martin’s book offers a compelling and deeply textured account of arguments over the piety, language, translation, and other aspects of the Aristotelian corpus. This is a book that beautifully shows the interrelationships of the histories of science and religion, while taking readings on a journey through the philosophical corpora of some of the most foundational thinkers on the nature of the cosmos and the soul; through transformations in the craft of historical analysis; and through an important period when translation (and debates about it) helped shape the intellectual histories of the medieval and early modern worlds. It is a fascinating book, and an especially important study for anyone interested in the history of early modern science and/or the relationships between the early histories of science and religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Craig Martin‘s new book carefully traces religious arguments for and against Aristotelianism from the eleventh through the eighteenth centuries. Based on a close reading of a staggering array of primary sources, Subverting Aristotle: Religion, History, and Philosophy in Early Modern Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014) in turn subverts several assumptions about the connection between Aristotelian thought and the emergence of the new sciences in early modernity. The book argues that we ought to understand the seventeenth century decline of Aristotle and Aristotelians as an authority in natural philosophy in its relation to the contemporaneous religious readings of Aristotelian texts. In a series of chapters that each look carefully at a particular temporal and philosophical context of debate over the readings of Aristotle, Averroes, and their interlocutors by various religious communities, Martin’s book offers a compelling and deeply textured account of arguments over the piety, language, translation, and other aspects of the Aristotelian corpus. This is a book that beautifully shows the interrelationships of the histories of science and religion, while taking readings on a journey through the philosophical corpora of some of the most foundational thinkers on the nature of the cosmos and the soul; through transformations in the craft of historical analysis; and through an important period when translation (and debates about it) helped shape the intellectual histories of the medieval and early modern worlds. It is a fascinating book, and an especially important study for anyone interested in the history of early modern science and/or the relationships between the early histories of science and religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Craig Martin‘s new book carefully traces religious arguments for and against Aristotelianism from the eleventh through the eighteenth centuries. Based on a close reading of a staggering array of primary sources, Subverting Aristotle: Religion, History, and Philosophy in Early Modern Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014) in turn subverts several assumptions about the connection between Aristotelian thought and the emergence of the new sciences in early modernity. The book argues that we ought to understand the seventeenth century decline of Aristotle and Aristotelians as an authority in natural philosophy in its relation to the contemporaneous religious readings of Aristotelian texts. In a series of chapters that each look carefully at a particular temporal and philosophical context of debate over the readings of Aristotle, Averroes, and their interlocutors by various religious communities, Martin’s book offers a compelling and deeply textured account of arguments over the piety, language, translation, and other aspects of the Aristotelian corpus. This is a book that beautifully shows the interrelationships of the histories of science and religion, while taking readings on a journey through the philosophical corpora of some of the most foundational thinkers on the nature of the cosmos and the soul; through transformations in the craft of historical analysis; and through an important period when translation (and debates about it) helped shape the intellectual histories of the medieval and early modern worlds. It is a fascinating book, and an especially important study for anyone interested in the history of early modern science and/or the relationships between the early histories of science and religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Transcript -- A detailed discussion with Professor Richard Sorabji about the Stoics views of emotions in contrast to the Aristotelians views

A detailed discussion with Professor Richard Sorabji about the Stoics views of emotions in contrast to the Aristotelians views