首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


A fallacy of aristotle's about ends
Authors:J. O. Urmson
Affiliation:(1) 5, Appleton Road, Cumnor, OX2 9QH Oxford, UK
Abstract:A distinction between lsquoactivitiesrsquo and lsquoprocessesrsquo plays an important role in Aristotle's argument to establish that the good life is a life of activities, among which metaphysical contemplation is foremost. But, as a result of having failed to distinguish internal from external ends of action, Aristotle makes fallacious inferences from every activity's having an internal end in itself to its possessing features which may be legitimately inferred only from external ends, and from every process's having an internal end that is its terminal point to its having the attainment of that terminal point as an external end. The resulting confusion explains a number of problematic elements in Aristotle's ethical theory.
Keywords:eudaemonia  energeia (  /content/n4973r57341515w7/xxlarge8216.gif"   alt="  lsquo"   align="  BASELINE"   BORDER="  0"  >activity  /content/n4973r57341515w7/xxlarge8217.gif"   alt="  rsquo"   align="  BASELINE"   BORDER="  0"  >)  kinesis (  /content/n4973r57341515w7/xxlarge8216.gif"   alt="  lsquo"   align="  BASELINE"   BORDER="  0"  >process  /content/n4973r57341515w7/xxlarge8217.gif"   alt="  rsquo"   align="  BASELINE"   BORDER="  0"  >)  internal ends  external ends  intrinsic value
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号