David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Phronesis 53 (3):243 - 270 (2008)
Aristotle's claim that natural slaves do not possess autonomous rationality (Pol. 1.5, 1254b20-23) cannot plausibly be interpreted in an unrestricted sense, since this would conflict with what Aristotle knew about non-Greek societies. Aristotle's argument requires only a lack of autonomous practical rationality. An impairment of the capacity for integrated practical deliberation, resulting from an environmentally induced excess or deficiency in thumos (Pol. 7.7, 1327b18-31), would be sufficient to make natural slaves incapable of eudaimonia without being obtrusively implausible relative to what Aristotle is likely to have believed about non-Greeks. Since Aristotle seems to have believed that the existence of people who can be enslaved without injustice is a hypothetical necessity, if those capable oí eudaimonia are to achieve it, the existence of natural slaves has implications for our understanding of Aristotle's natural teleology
|Keywords||THUMOS DELIBERATION SLAVERY TELEOLOGY ARISTOTLE|
|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
Thomas K. Johansen (2012). Capacity and Potentiality: Aristotle's Metaphysics Θ.6–7 From the Perspective of the De Anima. Topoi 31 (2):209-220.
Malcolm Heath (2008). Aristotle on Natural Slavery. Phronesis 53 (3):243-270.
Robert Mayhew (1997). Part and Whole in Aristotle's Political Philosophy. Journal of Ethics 1 (4):325-340.
Mariska Leunissen (2010). Aristotle's Syllogistic Model of Knowledge and the Biological Sciences: Demonstrating Natural Processes. Apeiron 43 (2-3):31-60.
Mariska Elisabeth Maria Philomena Johannes Leunissen, Explanation and Teleology in Aristotle's Philosophy of Nature.
J. M. E. Moravcsik (1967). Aristotle. Garden City, N.Y.,Anchor Books.
J. M. E. Moravcsik (1968). Aristotle: A Collection of Critical Essays. Melbourne, Macmillan.
Mohan Matthen (2009). Why Does Earth Move to the Center? An Examination of Some Explanatory Strategies in Aristotle's Cosmology. In Alan C. Bowen & Christian Wildberg (eds.), New Perspectives on Aristotle's De Caelo. Brill 1--119.
Lynne Spellman (1995). Substance and Separation in Aristotle. Cambridge University Press.
Mariska Leunissen (2010). Explanation and Teleology in Aristotle's Science of Nature. Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads71 ( #45,931 of 1,725,840 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #210,637 of 1,725,840 )
How can I increase my downloads?