Jedan od temeljnih pojmova Aristotelove teorije o pjesništvu je ‘vjerojatno’. Obično se o ‘vjerojatnom’ misli kao o onom što je slično istini, no za Aristotela to je tek jedna od njegovih značajki. Sam pojam vjerojatnog produbljuje iznoseći razlike između povijesnog i pjesničkog govora, preko dogođenog i onoga što bi se moglo dogoditi. Članak donosi analizu Aristotelovog nadilaženja Platonovog shvaćanja umjetnosti, u prvom redu shvaćanjem umjetnosti kao vještine te novim odnosom prema oponašanju, zatim proučava razvoj razlike između istinitog i sličnog, između (...) mogućeg i nemogućeg. Izravni je interes ove studije pokazati kako Aristotel preko navedenih razlika ukazuje ne samo na filozofsku dimenziju pjesništva, nego i da preko pojma vjerojatnog umjetničkom djelu potvrđuje njegovu unutarnju koherenciju i vezu koja ne ovisi o izvanjskim zakonitostima te da umjetničko djelo u sebi pronalazi svoj princip, sredstvo i cilj.One of the fundamental concepts of Aristotle’s theory of poetry is ‘probable’. ‘Probable’ is usually thought of being similar to truth, as for Aristotle it is but one of its features. Reflecting the differences between historical and poetic expression, through what happened and what might happen, Aristotle deepens the concept of ‘probable’. The article analyzes Aristotle’s surpassing Plato’s comprehension of art, primary through perceiving art as a skill and the new attitude toward imitation. Thereupon, the development of the difference between true and similar is being studied: between the possible and the impossible. The main interest of this study is to present how Aristotle, through mentioned differences, indicates not only the philosophical dimension of poetry, but through the concept of ‘probable’, confirms inner coherence and connection of a work of art which does not depend on external laws but finds its own principle, means and objectives within itself. (shrink)

Aristotelov nauk o navici, osim toga što je važan i bogat u sebi, predstavlja temelj potpunijeg shvaćanja njegove teorije o vrlinama, a time i njegove cjelokupne etike. Osnovne ideje ove problematike kroz cijelu povijest filozofije često su budile interes, a i danas njegov nauk tvori jezgru razmišljanja o navici, te je neminovno polazište suvremenih spekulacija. Stoga ćemo se uz obradu glavnih tekstova o navici u Aristotelovim djelima osvrnuti i na interpretaciju talijanskog filozofa Luigi Pareysona, koji smatra da je Aristotelova originalnost (...) u ideji vezivanja dvaju različitih pojmova éthos i héxis. Pareyson osobito osvjetljava vezu u kojoj éthos završava da bi dao mjesto héxisu te objašnjava kako héxis može proizići iz éthosa.U prvom redu iznijet ćemo razliku i odnos između héxis i éthosa te kako oni mogu biti izvor navici, koja je kao takva rezultat i uvjet čovjekova djelovanja. Po Aristotelu, preko ponavljanja čina navika omogućava da čovjek bude onakvim kakvim se sam čini, pri čemu se događa prijelaz sa slobode na neophodnost, te s truda na spontanost. Drugim riječima, one radnje koje su samoj volji u početku predstavljale napor i trud, nakon postizanja navike iste radnje obavlja spontano i lako. Ovu vlastitost navike Aristotel smatra vrlo važnom u odgoju i politici radi čega se može reći kako je ova tema i u današnjem vremenu vrlo aktualna.Besides being important and rich in itself, Aristotle’s concept of habit represents the foundation of a more comprehensive understanding of his theory of virtues, and with it his ethics as a whole. Throughout the entire history of philosophy the underlying ideas of this issue have frequently generated interest; even today his teachings lie at the very core of one’s reflections on habit and are inevitably the very starting point of contemporary speculations. Thus, in addition to analysing Aristotle’s main texts on habit, this paper also examines the interpretations given by the Italian philosopher Luigi Pareyson, who holds that Aristotle’s originality lies in the idea of linking two different concepts, namely éthos and héxis. Pareyson sheds light on the relation in which ethos ends in order to make room for héxis, and further explains that the latter can issue from the former.The authoress first expounds the difference and relation between éthos and héxis, as well as the way in which they can be the source of habit, which is – as such – both the outcome and condition of man’s deeds. According to Aristotle, by repeating acts, habits enable man to be such as he appears to be to himself, in which freedom transforms into necessity and effort into spontaneity. In other words, once the acts that were initially effortful and laborious to the will become a habit, the will does them spontaneously and with ease. Aristotle considers this property of habit vitally important in education and politics, due to which it can indeed be said that this topic is current even today. (shrink)