ARISTOTLE ON ONTOLOGICAL PRIORITY

Date

2020-01-01

Author

Ünlü, Hikmet

Metadata

Show full item record

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Item Usage Stats

301
views

0
downloads

There are several passages in the Metaphysics where Aristotle explains ontological priority in terms of ontological dependence, but there are others where he seems to adopt a teleological conception of ontological priority. It is sometimes maintained that the latter priority too must be construed in terms of the former, or that the priorities in question arc not both endorsed (or simultaneously endorsed) by Aristotle. The goal of this paper is to show otherwise; I argue that what is at issue are two distinct priorities that Aristotle simultaneously endorses.

Subject Keywords

Aristotle, Ontological Priority, Ontological Dependence, Separation, Substance

URI

https://hdl.handle.net/11511/42085

Journal

ACTA PHILOSOPHICA

DOI

https://doi.org/10.19272/202000701008

Collections

Department of Philosophy, Article

Suggestions

OpenMETU
Core

Nietzsche on fate and freedom Beşkardeşler, Sedef; Parkan, Barış; Department of Philosophy (2013) At face value, Nietzsche’s approach to the problem of free will may seem contradictory since he rejects both free will and determinism. However, a detailed analysis of Nietzsche’s texts will show that, while he uncovers the traditional and psychological background of both the belief in free will and unfree will, he develops his unique understanding of freedom and fate. To state more precisely, Nietzsche repudiates both an understanding of free will which is claimed to be a priorily possessed and also an ide...
THE CONCEPT OF AKRASIA IN ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSOPHY: PLATO, ARISTOTLE, AND THE STOICS Akkökler Karatekeli, Büşra; Turan, Şeref Halil; Department of Philosophy (2022-9) This thesis investigates the concept of akrasia, with particular attention given to its sundry interpretations in the philosophies of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. In this inquiry, I argue that these philosophers agree on the lack of knowledge of the akratic person, while they differentiate from each other as to what this missing knowledge is. Irrespective of their rejection or acknowledgement of akrasia due to their conceptions of the soul, I argue that Plato, Aristotle and the Stoics share the common ...
Ontolojik natüralizm ve yöntemsel natüralizm birbirini dışlar: deneysel parapsikolojinin düşündürdükleri üzerine Tümkaya, Serdal (Mantık Derneği Yayınları; 2018-12-31) In analytic Western philosophy, it is said to be two versions of naturalism. The first one is ontological and the second is methodological. Ontological version suggests that there are no supernatural entities. The methodological one argues that there are or should be no categorical distinctions between philosophy and science. I, herein, argue that these two versions exclude each other. Here are my major reasons. What is to be acknowledged as supernatural or natural cannot be foreknown. Science is subject to...
Free will and determinism: are they even relevant to each other? Çağatay, Hasan; Grünberg, Teo; Department of Philosophy (2012) Many philosophers tend to defend the view that there is a significant relation between the problem of determinism / indeterminism and the problem of free will. The belief that there exists such a significant relation is supported by our intuitions; however, in this thesis, I defend just the opposite view: free will has no significant dependence on the deterministic or indeterministic character of causal relations. In the same way, I propose that the question, whether or not determinism is true, cannot be an...
A study of the self in Nietzsche's fatalistic universe of eternal recurrence Canbolat, Argun Abrek; Parkan, Barış; Department of Philosophy (2009) The doctrine of eternal recurrence is not only an aspect of Nietzsche’s philosophy, but a notion that structures the base of his philosophy. The doctrine is analyzed by many interpreters in various ways. The cosmological and the ethical-existential approaches to the doctrine are at the very base wrong. The doctrine’s impact cannot be adequately understood in these terms. Besides, the doctrine of eternal recurrence has multiple problems within it, problems which can be solved if the doctrine is understood an...

Citation Formats

H. Ünlü, “ARISTOTLE ON ONTOLOGICAL PRIORITY,” ACTA PHILOSOPHICA, pp. 137–157, 2020, Accessed: 00, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://hdl.handle.net/11511/42085.