Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. L’imagination, produit d’une métaphore?René Lefebvre - 1999 - Dialogue 38 (3):469-.
    It would be contradictory to ask phainesthai to support both the strict sense (M. Schofield, M. Nussbaum), and metaphorical use (Simplicius) of phantasia. De anima, 428a2, raises many issues. When discovering imagination, Aristotle himself seems to use the word phantasia metaphorically.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Our Identity and the Separability of Persons and Organisms.René Lefebvre - 1999 - Dialogue 38 (3):519-534.
    It would be contradictory to ask phainesthai to support both the strict sense, and metaphorical use of phantasia. De anima, 428a2, raises many issues. When discovering imagination, Aristotle himself seems to use the word phantasia metaphorically.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Alexander of Aphrodisias’ Theory of Action and the Capacity of Doing Otherwise.Orna Harari - 2023 - Apeiron 56 (4):693-721.
    I examine Alexander of Aphrodisias’ theory of action, addressing the question how his view that human actions are determined by reason accounts for the capacity of doing otherwise. Calling into question the standard view that Alexander frees agents from internal determination, I argue that (1) the capacity of doing otherwise is a consequence of determination by reason, since it enables agents to do something different from what they would have done had they followed external circumstances; and (2) this capacity is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Alexander of Aphrodisias’ Criticism of the Stoic Theory of Perception: typos_ and _typōsis.Attila Hangai - 2022 - Elenchos: Rivista di Studi Sul Pensiero Antico 43 (2):339-362.
    The Stoics identified thephantasiawith the impression (typos) in the soul, or the impressing process (typōsis). Alexander of Aphrodisias engages directly with this account atDe anima68.10–21, and argues against the applicability of the impression in a theory of perception inMantissa10, especially 133.25–134.23. I analyse Alexander’s polemic account atDe anima68.10–21, I demonstrate that it differs from Chrysippus’ criticism of Cleanthes (contrary to some commentators), and I show how it fits in the context of his argument. From this analysis it will emerge how (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark