Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
λήθη μὲν τῆς τοιαύτης ἕξεως ἔστι, φρονήσεως δ’ οὐκ ἔστιν.
All translations I've come across take it in the sense:
"such a disposition can be forgotten, whereas prudence cannot be forgotten."
I'm wondering whether it can be alternatively taken to mean:
"forgetting is a feature of such a disposition, whereas it is not [a feature] of prudence."
All translations I've come across take it in the sense:
"such a disposition can be forgotten, whereas prudence cannot be forgotten."
I'm wondering whether it can be alternatively taken to mean:
"forgetting is a feature of such a disposition, whereas it is not [a feature] of prudence."
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:13 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
I think the literal translation would be:
The forgetting of such a ἕξις exists, while the forgetting of φρόνησις does not exist.
But there was also an accentation rule about ἐστίν that I cannot quite remember. Did it mean possible when it was accented like ἔστιν? I am sure others will clarify things more.
The forgetting of such a ἕξις exists, while the forgetting of φρόνησις does not exist.
But there was also an accentation rule about ἐστίν that I cannot quite remember. Did it mean possible when it was accented like ἔστιν? I am sure others will clarify things more.
- Barry Hofstetter
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1739
- Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
hairetikon wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 11:49 am I think the literal translation would be:
The forgetting of such a ἕξις exists, while the forgetting of φρόνησις does not exist.
But there was also an accentation rule about ἐστίν that I cannot quite remember. Did it mean possible when it was accented like ἔστιν? I am sure others will clarify things more.
Smyth, H. W. (1920). A Greek Grammar for Colleges (p. 43). New York; Cincinnati; Chicago; Boston; Atlanta: American Book Company.[187].b. ἐστί is written ἔστι at the beginning of a sentence; when it expresses existence or possibility; when it follows οὐκ, μή, εἰ, ὡς, καί, ἀλλά (or ἀλλʼ), τοῦτο (or τοῦτʼ); and in ἔστιν οἵ some, ἔστιν ὅτε sometimes. Thus, εἰ ἔστιν οὕτως if it is so, τοῦτο ὃ ἔστι that which exists.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Cuncta mortalia incerta...
Cuncta mortalia incerta...
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 465
- Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:10 pm
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
Tugodum - I'm guessing the context of the passage would answer your question. Perhaps you could supply it.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
Randy, I'm asking whether it is possible in terms of Greek syntax. Otherwise, we'd have to discuss Aristotle's concepts, which seems to be off topic here.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 4790
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
Of course it’s syntactically possible (if we isolate it from its context and disregard the accentuation), but that’s not what it means.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:13 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
Considering Barry's clarification (ἐστί is written ἔστι...when it follows οὐκ), the accentuation apparently does not necessitate the possibility sense.
Tugodum: I am not sure why you are inclined towards the "forgetting is a feature of such a disposition" interpretation. If the text were simply λόγος ἀνθρώπου ἔστι, would you be inclined to interpret this as λόγος is a feature of the human being?
Tugodum: I am not sure why you are inclined towards the "forgetting is a feature of such a disposition" interpretation. If the text were simply λόγος ἀνθρώπου ἔστι, would you be inclined to interpret this as λόγος is a feature of the human being?
- Barry Hofstetter
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1739
- Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
But consider that the first ἔστι is so accented, and does not follow οὐκ.hairetikon wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:46 pm Considering Barry's clarification (ἐστί is written ἔστι...when it follows οὐκ), the accentuation apparently does not necessitate the possibility sense.
Tugodum: I am not sure why you are inclined towards the "forgetting is a feature of such a disposition" interpretation. If the text were simply λόγος ἀνθρώπου ἔστι, would you be inclined to interpret this as λόγος is a feature of the human being?
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Cuncta mortalia incerta...
Cuncta mortalia incerta...
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:13 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
You are right. Sorry.Barry Hofstetter wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 7:09 pmBut consider that the first ἔστι is so accented, and does not follow οὐκ.hairetikon wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:46 pm Considering Barry's clarification (ἐστί is written ἔστι...when it follows οὐκ), the accentuation apparently does not necessitate the possibility sense.
Tugodum: I am not sure why you are inclined towards the "forgetting is a feature of such a disposition" interpretation. If the text were simply λόγος ἀνθρώπου ἔστι, would you be inclined to interpret this as λόγος is a feature of the human being?
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
Thanks everybody. I have to admit, I had not factored in the accentuation.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:13 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
This discussion made me think: are all of the extant Aristotle manuscripts themselves accented? When did accents began to be marked in these manuscripts anyway?
By the way, fool around with some of the digitized manuscripts; it is really fun. https://guides.library.yale.edu/Aristot ... anuscripts
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
hairetikon -- Thanks for the link, it is fun indeed. My understanding is that accentuation was introduced by Byzantine scribes, who might be great grammarians but not so great thinkers. I understand how a habit may be lost by not exercising it but it does not seem natural to me to call such loss of a habit "forgetting" it. One may forget this or that opinion one used to hold, or to altogether lose the habit of forming opinions, but not to forget a habit, as it seems. Also, it is far from clear to me why, on Aristotle's account, prudence, as a habit, cannot be "forgotten" (i.e., lost by not exercising).
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:13 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
I don't think that habit is a good transltion for ἕξις, but at any rate, Aristotle says in Metaphysics 1047a1 that we can lose the art (which, too, is a ἕξις) either by forgetting or by some suffering or by time (ἢ γὰρ λήθῃ ἢ πάθει τινὶ ἢ χρόνῳ). A temporary cessation of the exercise of an art does not entail its loss (so the Megarians are wrong) but decades of inactivity would lead to forgetting.Tugodum wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 9:44 pm hairetikon -- Thanks for the link, it is fun indeed. My understanding is that accentuation was introduced by Byzantine scribes, who might be great grammarians but not so great thinkers. I understand how a habit may be lost by not exercising it but it does not seem natural to me to call such loss of a habit "forgetting" it. One may forget this or that opinion one used to hold, or to altogether lose the habit of forming opinions, but not to forget a habit, as it seems. Also, it is far from clear to me why, on Aristotle's account, prudence, as a habit, cannot be "forgotten" (i.e., lost by not exercising).
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
hairetikon -- Thanks for the reference, it is helpful! But there the λήθη in the dative indicates the means, whereas the action is expressed by the participle of ἀποβάλλω.
This makes perfect sense: a "habit" (or, "state") can be lost in virtue of (or, due to) the forgetting of certain things.
This makes perfect sense: a "habit" (or, "state") can be lost in virtue of (or, due to) the forgetting of certain things.
Last edited by Tugodum on Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
p.s. This is what my initial guess was: it is possible to forget certain relevant things while being in the state under discussion, and this results in the loss of the state.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
p.p.s. I think ἕξις here means something like a disposition. A disposition can be lost, no doubt. But losing a disposition does not necessarily imply forgetting it. I perfectly remember some dispositions that I used to have. Likewise, forgetting about a disposition that one has does not seem to imply necessarily losing it.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 465
- Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:10 pm
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
Oh, I see. But wait! Apparently hairetikon has seduced you into just that discussion (perhaps because his name means "the factious thing"? ).Otherwise, we'd have to discuss Aristotle's concepts, which seems to be off topic here.
Which is perfectly fine by me. But I'm having a hard time distinguishing what you think is syntactically possible from what you think Aristotle meant from what your own psychological opinion is. I don't know where you grabbed this sentence of Aristotle's from, but if you're reading the Nicomachean Ethics, I'd like to know what you think Aristotle meant.
- Barry Hofstetter
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1739
- Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm
Re: Aristotle, EN 1140 b29-30
He found it right where it is, NE Book 6, 1140b. Here is a bit more context:RandyGibbons wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 12:17 pmOh, I see. But wait! Apparently hairetikon has seduced you into just that discussion (perhaps because his name means "the factious thing"? ).Otherwise, we'd have to discuss Aristotle's concepts, which seems to be off topic here.
Which is perfectly fine by me. But I'm having a hard time distinguishing what you think is syntactically possible from what you think Aristotle meant from what your own psychological opinion is. I don't know where you grabbed this sentence of Aristotle's from, but if you're reading the Nicomachean Ethics, I'd like to know what you think Aristotle meant.
ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδʼ ἕξις μετὰ λόγου μόνον· σημεῖον δʼ ὅτι λήθη μὲν τῆς τοιαύτης ἕξεως ἔστι, φρονήσεως δʼ οὐκ ἔστιν.
Aristotle. (1894). Nicomachean Ethics (Greek). (J. Bywater, Ed.). Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library.
Kind of a fun discussion, actually.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Cuncta mortalia incerta...
Cuncta mortalia incerta...