David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Classical Quarterly 25 (01):158- (1975)
Alexander is arguing that our responsibility for what we do () is grounded in the fact that a man is the of his own actions . The opponents of this view, he says, hold that nothing performed by a man is such that at the time when he does something he also has the possibility of not doing it, . One who believes this, he argues, cannot make any moral judgements or do any of the things ‘which ought reasonably to be brought about by those who have believed the possibility also of doing each of the things which they do’. My translation has, I hope, shown the need for a negative in the last clause: ‘the possibility also of not doing’ is the point needed; so insert between and . For omission of the negative elsewhere in De fato cf. 165. 1; 179. 21; 189. 6; 195. 26; 202. 12; 207. 19; 211. 18
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Richard Gaskin (1993). Alexander's Sea Battle: A Discussion of Alexander of Aphrodisias "De Fato" 10. Phronesis 38 (1):75 - 94.
Richard Gaskin (1993). Alexander's Sea Battle: A Discussion of Alexander of Aphrodisias De Fato 10. Phronesis 38 (1):75-94.
A. A. Long (1970). Stoic Determinism and Alexander of Aphrodisias De Fato (I-Xiv). Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 52 (3):247-268.
R. W. Sharples (1978). Alexander of Aphrodisias, De Fato: Some Parallels. Classical Quarterly 28 (02):243-.
Dorothea Frede (1982). The Dramatization of Determinism: Alexander of Aphrodisias' De Fato. Phronesis 27 (3):276-298.
R. W. Sharples (1975). Aristotelian and Stoic Conceptions of Necessity in the "De Fato" of Alexander of Aphrodisias. Phronesis 20 (3):247 - 274.
R. W. Sharples (1975). Aristotelian and Stoic Conceptions of Necessity in the De Fato of Alexander of Aphrodisias. Phronesis 20 (3):247-274.
Robert B. Todd (1976). Alexander of Aphrodisias on Stoic Physics: A Study of the De Mixtione with Preliminary Essays, Text, Translation and Commentary. Brill.
Jonathan Barnes & Susanne Bobzien (1991). Alexander of Aphrodisias' on Aristotle's Prior Analytics 1.1-7. Duckworth.
Luca Gili (2012). Alexander of Aphrodisias's Solution to the Puzzle of the Two Modal Barbaras: A Semantic Approach. Documenti E Studi Sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale 23:35-64.
H. J. Blumenthal (1991). Alexander of Aphrodisias' Ethical Problems R. W. Sharples (Tr.): Alexander of Aphrodisias, Ethical Problems. (Ancient Commentators on Aristotle.) Pp. 145. London: Duckworth, 1990. £24. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 41 (02):320-322.
Dorothea Frede (1982). The Dramatization of Determinism: Alexander of Aphrodisias' "De Fato". Phronesis 27 (3):276 - 298.
D. Frank (1996). Review. Alexander of Aphrodisias. Alexander of Aphrodisias, Quaestiones 2.16-3.15. R W Sharples (Tr). The Classical Review 46 (2):235-236.
Added to index2010-12-09
Total downloads9 ( #223,023 of 1,696,545 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #343,026 of 1,696,545 )
How can I increase my downloads?