Aristotle’s First Moves Regarding Perception: A Reading of (most of) De Anima 2.5
Abstract
Whereas scholars often look to De Anima 2.5 to support one or another understanding of the sense in which perception, for Aristotle, qualifies as an alteration and qualitative assimilation to the sense-object, I ask the more basic question of what the chapter is meant to establish or accomplish with respect to the question whether perception is an alteration. I argue that the chapter does not presuppose or legitimate the view that perception is an alteration where it is thought to, and that it is meant rather to challenge that view, most importantly, by putting its argumentative weight behind a different model of perception, leading to a kind of antinomy. What stands in the way of understanding perception as an alteration (and assimilation to the sense-object), in this chapter, is ultimately the lack of an account of perceiving a quality as having that quality.
Anagnostopoulos, A. 2017. “Change, Agency and the Incomplete in Aristotle”. Phronesis 62, 170–209.10.1163/15685284-12341323Search in Google Scholar
Bowin, J. 2011. “Aristotle on Various Types of Alteration in De Anima II 5”. Phronesis 56, 138–61.10.1163/156852811X558456Search in Google Scholar
–. 2012a. “Aristotle on “First Transitions” in De Anima II 5”. Apeiron 45, 262–82.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2012b. “De Anima ii 5 on the Activation of the Senses”. Ancient Philosophy 32, 87–104.10.5840/ancientphil20123215Search in Google Scholar
Buchheim, T. 2016. Aristoteles: De anima – Über die Seele. Griechisch – Deutsch. Übersetzt mit Einleitung und Kommentar. Darmstadt.10.28937/978-3-7873-2790-4Search in Google Scholar
Burnyeat, M. 2001. A Map of Metaphysics Zeta. Pittsburgh.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2002. “De Anima II 5”. Phronesis 47, 28–90.10.1163/156852802760075693Search in Google Scholar
–. 2004. “Introduction: Aristotle on the Foundations of Sublunary Physics”. In Aristotle’s De Generatione et Corruptione I: Symposium Aristotelicum. Eds. F. de Hass/J. Mansfeld. Oxford, 7–24.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2008. “Κίνησις vs. Ἐνέργεια: A Passage in (but not of) Aristotle’s Metaphysics”. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 34, 219–92.Search in Google Scholar
Caston, V. 2005. “The Spirit and the Letter”. In Metaphysics, Soul, and Ethics: Themes from the Work of Richard Sorabji. Ed. R. Salles Oxford, 245–320.Search in Google Scholar
Charles, D. 1984. Aristotle’s Philosophy of Action. Ithaca.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2008. “Aristotle’s Psychological Theory”. Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 24, 1–29.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2021. The Divided Self: Aristotle on the Mind-Body Problem. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
Coope, U. 2012. “246a10–246b3”. In Reading Aristotle Physics VII 3: “What Is Alteration?”. Eds. S. Maso/C. Natali/G. Seel, Las Vegas, 57–72.Search in Google Scholar
Förster, A. 1912. Aristotelis De Anima Libri III. Budapest.Search in Google Scholar
Gill, M. L. 1989. Aristotle on Substance: The Paradox of Unity. Princeton.Search in Google Scholar
Gonzalez, F. J. 2019. “Being as Activity: A Defense of the Importance of Metaphysics 1048b18–36 for Aristotle’s Ontology”. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 56, 123–91.10.1093/oso/9780198851059.003.0004Search in Google Scholar
Heinaman R. 1994. “Kosman on Activity and Change”. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 12, 207–18.Search in Google Scholar
–. 2007. “Actuality, Potentiality and De Anima 2.5”. Phronesis 52, 139–87.10.1163/156852807X180063Search in Google Scholar
Herzberg, S. 2007. “De Anima II 5 und Aristoteles’ Wahrnehmungstheorie”. Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung, 61(1), 98–120.10.3196/004433007780130389Search in Google Scholar
Hicks, R. D. 1907. Aristoteles, De Anima. Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
Isépy, P./Prapa, C. 2018. “Der Codex Berolinensis Phillippicus 1507: Nachfahre eines unabhängigen Zweiges der Aristoteles-Überlieferung? Eine kodikologisch-paläographische, stemmatische und textkritische Untersuchung am Beispiel von Aristoteles, Sens. und Mem”. Revue d’Histoire des Textes 13, 1‒58.10.1484/J.RHT.5.114885Search in Google Scholar
Jannone, A./Barbotin, E. 1966. Aristote De l’Âme. Paris.Search in Google Scholar
Johansen, T. 2012. The Powers of Aristotle’s Soul. Oxford.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199658435.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Kelsey, S. 2018. “An Aporia about Aisthêsis. In Aristotele e le sfide del suo tempo. Eds. R. Radice/M. Zanata. Milan, 161–71. Search in Google Scholar
Lorenz, H. 2007. “The Assimilation of Sense to Sense-Object in Aristotle”. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 33, 179–220.Search in Google Scholar
Maso, S./Natali, C./Seel, G. (eds.) 2012. Reading Aristotle Physics VII.3: “What Is Alteration?”. Las Vegas.Search in Google Scholar
Menn, S. 2002. “Aristotle’s Definition of Soul and the Programme of the De Anima”. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 22, 83–139.10.1093/oso/9780199255894.003.0004Search in Google Scholar
Morison, B. 2012. “245b3–246a9”. In Reading Aristotle Physics VII.3: “What Is Alteration?”. Eds. S. Maso/C. Natali/G. Seel. Las Vegas, 43–56.Search in Google Scholar
Polansky, R. 2010. Aristotle’s De Anima: A Critical Commentary. Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
Primavesi, O. 2020. “Introduction Part II: the Text of De Motu Animalium”. In Aristotle’s De Motu Animalium: Symposium Aristotelicum. Eds. O. Primavesi/C. Rapp. Oxford, 67–156.10.1093/oso/9780198835561.003.0002Search in Google Scholar
Rashed, M. 2005. Aristote: De la Géneration et la Corruption. Paris.Search in Google Scholar
Rapp, C. 2006. “Interaction of Body and Soul. What the Hellenistic Philosophers Saw and Aristotle Avoided”. In Common to Body and Soul. Ed. R. King. Berlin/New York, 187–208.10.1515/9783110196511.187Search in Google Scholar
Ross, W. D. 1950. Aristotelis Physica. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1955. Aristotle Parva Naturalia. A Revised Text with Introduction and Commentary. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1956. Aristotelis De Anima. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
–. 1961. Aristotle: De Anima. Edited with Introduction and Commentary. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
Shields, C. 2015. Aristotle’s De Anima. Translated with an Introduction and Commentary. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
Witt, 1992. “Dialectic, Motion and Perception: De Anima Book I”. In Essays on Aristotle’s De Anima. Eds. M. Nussbaum/A. Rorty. Oxford, 169–83.10.1093/019823600X.003.0011Search in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Titelseiten
- Articles
- Temperance and Epistemic Purity in Plato’s Phaedo
- Categories in Topics I 9: A New Plea For a Traditional Interpretation
- Aristotle’s First Moves Regarding Perception: A Reading of (most of) De Anima 2.5
- Kant on Civil Self-Sufficiency
- Kant’s Argument for Transcendental Idealism in the Transcendental Aesthetic Revisited
- Life, Lawfulness, and Contingency: Kant and Schelling on Organic Nature
- Book Reviews
- Muratori, Cecilia. Renaissance Vegetarianism: The Philosophical Afterlives of Porphyry’s On Abstinence. Cambridge: Legenda 2020, xiv + 276 pp.
- Abazari, Arash. Hegel’s Ontology of Power: The Structure of Social Domination in Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2020, xvii + 218 pp.
Articles in the same Issue
- Titelseiten
- Articles
- Temperance and Epistemic Purity in Plato’s Phaedo
- Categories in Topics I 9: A New Plea For a Traditional Interpretation
- Aristotle’s First Moves Regarding Perception: A Reading of (most of) De Anima 2.5
- Kant on Civil Self-Sufficiency
- Kant’s Argument for Transcendental Idealism in the Transcendental Aesthetic Revisited
- Life, Lawfulness, and Contingency: Kant and Schelling on Organic Nature
- Book Reviews
- Muratori, Cecilia. Renaissance Vegetarianism: The Philosophical Afterlives of Porphyry’s On Abstinence. Cambridge: Legenda 2020, xiv + 276 pp.
- Abazari, Arash. Hegel’s Ontology of Power: The Structure of Social Domination in Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2020, xvii + 218 pp.
