Eudemian Ethics on what is “true but not clarifying”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_20_9Keywords:
method, ethics, truth, explanationAbstract
In Eudemian Ethics I 6, Aristotle describes the progress of the ethical investigation as a drift from a) what is true but not clarifying to b) what is true and clarifying. The drift from a) to b) is usually interpreted as the overcome of a first obscure and confused grasp of the subject by a more accurate and reliable account. In this paper, I claim that the understanding of the methodological role of a) depends upon it’s dissociation from the notions of obscurity and confusion. What is true but not clarifying should be rather understood as a first indistinct (but not confused) grasp of the subject. It’s insufficiency as regards explanation is to be accounted on the base of its indistinctness and not on it’s supposed obscurity.
Downloads
References
ALLAN, D. J. (1961). Quasi-mathematical method in the Eudemian Ethics. In: MANSION, S. (ed.). Aris-tote et Les Problèmes de Méthode. Louvain, Éditions de L'Institut Supérieur de Philosophie, p. 303-3018
ANGIONI, L. (2011). Aristóteles. Ética a Nicômaco, Livro VI. Dissertatio 34, p.285-300
BARNES, J. (1980). Aristotle and the methods of ethics. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, v. 34, p.490-511
BEKKER, I. (1831) (ed.). ΠΕΡΙ ΤΑ ΖΩΙΑ ΙΣΤΟΡΙΩΝ. Berlin, G. Reimer
_____. (1831). (ed.). PHTORIKH PROΣ AΛEΞANΔPON. Berlin,G. Reimer
BUDDENSIEK, F. (1999). Die 8eorie des Glücks in Aristoteles' Eudemischer Ethik. Göt-tingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666252228
BYWATER, I. (1894). (ed.). Aristotelis. Ethica Ni-omachea. Oxford, Clarendon.
DALIMIER, C. (2013). Aristotle. Éthique a Eudème. Paris, Flammarion
DÉCARIE,V. (1984). Aristote. Éthique a Eudème. Paris, Vrin
DIRLMEIER, F. [1963] (1984). Aristoteles. Eude-mische Ethik. Berlin, Akademie Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1524/9783050048741
FREDE, D. (2012). >e endoxon mystique: what en-doxa are and what they are not. Oxford Studies in An-cient Philosphy 43, p.185-215 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199666164.003.0007
INWOOD, B.; WOOLF, R. (2013). Aristotle. Eu-demian Ethics. Cambridge, Cambridge U. P.
IRWIN, T. (1999). Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Indianapolis, Hackett.
JOST, L. J. (1991). Eudemian Ethical Method. In: AN-TON, J. P.; PREUS, A. (eds.). Essays in ancient Greek phi-losophy IV. Albany, State University of New York Press
KARBOWSKI, J. (2015a). Phainomena as wit-nesses and examples: the methodology of Eudemian Ethics I 6. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy v. 49, p. 193-226.
_____(2015b). Endoxa, facts, and the starting points of the Nicomachean Ethics. In: HENRY, D.; NIELSEN, K. M. (eds.). Bridging the gap between Aristotle’s science and ethics. Cambridge, Cambridge U. P., p.113-129 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511846397.007
KASSEL, R. (1965). (ed.). Aristotelis De Arte Poetica Liber. Oxford, ClarendonKENNY, A. (1978). 8e aristotelian ethics. Ox-ford, Clarendon. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245544.001.0001
_____ . (2011). Aristotle. 8e Eudemian Ethics. Ox-ford, Oxford U.P.
KONSTAN, D. (1975). A Note on Aristotle Physics 1.1. Archiv für Geschichte der Philoso-phie, n.º57, p. 241-245. https://doi.org/10.1515/agph.1975.57.3.241
LEE, H. D. (1952) (ed.). Aristotle. Meteorologica. Cambridge, Harvard U.P.
LESHER, J. (2010). Saphêneia in Aristotle: ‘Clar-ity’, ‘Precision’, and ‘Knowledge’. Apeiron, p.143-156. https://doi.org/10.1515/apeiron.2010.43.4.143
LIDDELL, H.; SCOTT, R.; JONES, H. S. [1843] (1996). A Greek English lexicon. Oxford, Clarendon
NATALI, C. (2007). Rhetorical and scienti+c as-pects of Nicomachean Ethics. Phronesis 52, p. 364-381. https://doi.org/10.1163/156852807X229258.
_____ (2010). Posterior Analytics and the de+nition of happiness in NE I. Phronesis 55, p.304-324. https://doi.org/10.1163/156852810X523905
NUSSBAUM, M. C. [1986] (2001). 8e fragility of goodness. Cambridge, Cambridge U. P. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511817915
OWEN, G. E. L. (1961) Tithenai ta phainomena. In MANSION, S. (ed.). Aristote et les problèmes de méthode. Louvain. Éditions de L' Institut Supérieur de Philosophie, p.83-103.PECK, A. L. (1942). Aristotle. Generation of Animals. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
_____ (1965). Aristotle. Historia Animalium.Cambridge, Harvard University Press.PRITZL, K. (1994). Opinions as appearances: en-doxa in Aristotle. Ancient Philosophy, n.º14, p. 41-50.
RACKHAM, H. (1935). Aristotle. 8e Eudemian Ethics. London, Heinemann. https://doi.org/10.5840/ancientphil199414148ROSS, D. (1925). Ethica Nicomachea. In: ROSS, D. 8e works of Aristotle, V. IX. Oxford, Clarendon.
ROSS, D. (1936). Aristotle’s Physics – A revised text with introduction and commentary by W. D. Ross. Oxford, Clarendon.
_____(1958). Aristotelis. Topica et Sophistici Elenchi. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
_____(1949). Aristotle’s Prior and Posterior Analytics. Oxford, Clarendon.
_____(1956). Aristotelis. De Anima. Oxford, Clarendon.SALMIERI, G. (2009). Aristotle’s Non-‘Dialectical’ Methodology in the Nicomachean Ethics. Ancient Phi-losophy, vol. 29, p. 311-335. https://doi.org/10.5840/ancientphil200929228
SIMPSON, P. (2013). 8e Eudemian Ethics of Aris-totle. New Brunswick. Transaction.
SOLOMON, J. (1925). Ethica Eudemia. In ROSS, D. 8e works of Aristotle, V. IX, Oxford, Clarendon.SUSEMIHL, F. (1884). (ed.). Aristoteles. Ethica Eu-demia. Leipzig, Teubner.
VERDENIUS, W. J. (1971). Human reason and God in the Eudemian Ethics. In: MORAUX, P.; HARLFINGER, D. (eds.). Untersuchungen zur Eudemischen Ethik. Berlin, De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110853872.285
WALZER, R. R.; MINGAY, J. M. (1991). (eds.). Aristotelis. Ethica Eudemia. Oxford, Clarendon.WEBSTER, E. W. (1931) Meteorologica. In: ROSS, D. 8e works of Aristotle, V. III, Oxford, Clarendon.
WOODS, M. [1982] (1992). Aristotle. Eudemian Eth-ics, Books I, II and VIII. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Raphael Zillig
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Given the public access policy of the journal, the use of the published texts is free, with the obligation of recognizing the original authorship and the first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their contents.
1. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
2. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original, and take full responsibility for its content in case of impugnation by third parties.
3. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation in another journal.
4. The authors keep the copyright and convey to the journal the right of first publication, the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License-BY.
5. The authors are allowed and stimulated to publicize and distribute their work on-line after the publication in the journal.
6. The authors of the approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries and similars.
7. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and to adequate the article to the editorial rules of the journal.
