Aristote
Pour Aristote, la connaissance commence par l’observation attentive du monde, tout tend vers une fin, et une vie bonne consiste à exercer les vertus – chacune étant un juste milieu entre trop et trop peu, comme le courage entre la lâcheté et la témérité.
Repères
A systématisé presque tous les domaines du savoir – logique, physique, métaphysique, éthique, politique. La forme se réalise dans la matière.
Idées clés
- Syllogistique
- Quatre causes
- La vertu comme juste milieu
- Eudaimonia
Maîtres: Platon
Ouvrir dans la carte stellaire
Influence
Influences reçues de 3
Empédocle
influencé par ✓
Aristotle took over Empedocles’ four elements as the simple bodies of the sublunary world, crediting him as the first to posit four (Metaphysics I.4). Aristotle, Metaphysics I.4, 985a31–33; On Generation and Corruption II.1–6; SEP “Empedocles”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Empédocle › v. 494–434 av. J.-C.
Socrate
influencé par ✓
Aristotle credited Socrates with inductive arguments and universal definition, the starting point of the theory of Forms, but rejected his denial of weakness of will (Metaphysics; Nicomachean Ethics). Aristotle, Metaphysics XIII.4, 1078b27–30; I.6, 987b1–6; Nicomachean Ethics VII.2, 1145b21–27
Socrate › 470–399 av. J.-C.
Démocrite
influencé par ✓
Aristotle treated Democritus as the earlier physicist who argued most from nature, discussing his atoms and void at length while rejecting both (On Generation and Corruption I.2, I.8). Aristotle, On Generation and Corruption I.2, I.8; Physics IV.6–9; SEP “Democritus”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Démocrite › v. 460–370 av. J.-C.
A influencé 60
Avicenne
a influencé ✓
Avicenna’s Book of the Cure (al-Shifa) follows the order of Aristotle’s corpus from logic to metaphysics, but reworks it into a system of his own. Ibn Sina, al-Shifa; D. Gutas, Avicenna and the Aristotelian Tradition (1988; 2nd ed. 2014); SEP “Ibn Sina [Avicenna]”
Avicenne › 980–1037
Thomas d’Aquin
a influencé ✓
Aquinas made Aristotle’s philosophy of nature and the soul the framework of his theology and, chiefly in 1268–73, commented on a dozen of his works. Thomas Aquinas, Sentencia libri De anima; In Metaphysicam; Sententia libri Ethicorum; SEP “Thomas Aquinas”
Thomas d’Aquin › v. 1225–1274
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
a influencé ✓
Leibniz rehabilitated Aristotle’s substantial forms against the mechanists in the Discourse on Metaphysics (1686) and later called his simple substances ‘entelechies’ (Monadology, 1714). G. W. Leibniz, Discours de métaphysique (1686); Monadologie (1714); SEP “Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz”
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz › 1646–1716
Adam Smith
a influencé
Smith ranked Aristotle’s virtue as a mean among the systems of propriety, saying it agrees ‘pretty exactly’ with his own account (The Theory of Moral Sentiments, 1759). A. Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759; 6th ed. 1790), part VII, sect. ii, ch. 1
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
Adam Smith › 1723–1790
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
a influencé ✓
Hegel closed his Encyclopaedia (1830) with Aristotle’s account of the divine thought that thinks itself, quoted in Greek from Book Lambda of the Metaphysics. G. W. F. Hegel, Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften (1830), conclusion; Aristotle, Metaphysics, Book Lambda; SEP “Hegel”
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel › 1770–1831
Martin Heidegger
a influencé ✓
Heidegger read Aristotle’s ethics and ontology phenomenologically in early lectures and the ‘Natorp report’ (1922, publ. 1989), groundwork for the analysis of Dasein in Being and Time (1927). M. Heidegger, “Phänomenologische Interpretationen zu Aristoteles (Anzeige der hermeneutischen Situation)” (1922; publ. 1989); Platon: Sophistes (lectures 1924–25; publ. 1992); Sein und Zeit (1927); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
Martin Heidegger › 1889–1976
Tout afficher (60)Afficher moins
Plotin
a influencé
Plotinus took over Aristotle’s self-thinking divine intellect as his second principle, Intellect, but set the One above it; Porphyry notes Aristotle’s Metaphysics is condensed in the Enneads. Porphyry, Life of Plotinus 14; Plotinus, Enneads V.3, VI.1–3; Aristotle, Metaphysics XII.9; SEP “Plotinus”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Plotin › 204–270
Porphyre de Tyr
a influencé
Porphyry wrote the Isagoge as an introduction to Aristotle’s Categories and held his logic compatible with Plato’s metaphysics, making Aristotle part of the Platonist curriculum. Porphyry, Isagoge; On Aristotle’s Categories (by question and answer); SEP “Porphyry”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Porphyre de Tyr › v. 234–305
Proclus
a influencé ✓
In the Neoplatonic curriculum Proclus first read Aristotle’s logic, ethics, politics, physics and theology with Syrianus as a preparation for Plato, as his biographer Marinus reports. Marinus, Proclus or On Happiness; SEP “Proclus”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Proclus › 412–485
Boèce
a influencé ✓
Boethius planned to translate all of Aristotle, to comment on him and show his agreement with Plato; his logical translations became the basis of early medieval logic. Boethius, In Aristotelis Peri hermeneias, editio secunda II, prologue; SEP “Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius”
Boèce › v. 477–524
Al-Kindi
a influencé
Al-Kindi’s circle translated Aristotle’s Metaphysics, and his On First Philosophy took up its idea of a science of first causes while arguing against the world’s eternity. al-Kindi, On First Philosophy, tr. A. L. Ivry, Al-Kindi’s Metaphysics (1974); P. Adamson, Al-Kindi (2007); SEP “al-Kindi”
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
Al-Kindi › v. 801–873
Al-Fârâbî
a influencé ✓
Al-Farabi commented on Aristotle’s logical works, notably On Interpretation, and surveyed his whole corpus in The Philosophy of Aristotle; later tradition called him the ‘Second Teacher’. al-Farabi, Commentary on De interpretatione, tr. F. W. Zimmermann (1981); The Philosophy of Aristotle, tr. M. Mahdi, Alfarabi’s Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle (1962); SEP “al-Farabi”
Al-Fârâbî › v. 872–950
Miskawayh
a influencé
Miskawayh built the Refinement of Character on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics in Ishaq ibn Hunayn’s Arabic translation: virtue as a mean between two vices and happiness as the perfection of the rational soul. Miskawayh, Tahdhīb al-akhlāq; O. Leaman, “Ibn Miskawayh”, in S. H. Nasr and O. Leaman (eds.), History of Islamic Philosophy (1996)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Miskawayh › v. 932–1030
Ibn Hazm
a influencé
In the Approach to the Limits of Logic Ibn Hazm set out Aristotle’s logic, replacing the usual examples with examples from law and grammar, and defended it as useful for every science, the religious ones included. Ibn Ḥazm, al-Taqrīb li-ḥadd al-manṭiq; C. Adang, M. Fierro and S. Schmidtke (eds.), Ibn Hazm of Cordoba (2013)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Ibn Hazm › 994–1064
Pierre Abélard
a influencé
Knowing only Aristotle’s Categories and On Interpretation in Boethius’ Latin, Abelard built on them his logic and his view that universals are words, not things. Abelard, Logica ‘Ingredientibus’; Dialectica; SEP “Peter Abelard”
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
Pierre Abélard › 1079–1142
Avempace
a influencé
Ibn Bajja commented on Aristotle’s Physics and On the Soul; his objection that motion in a void need not be instantaneous was reported and discussed by Averroes. E. A. Moody, “Galileo and Avempace”, Journal of the History of Ideas 12 (1951); SEP “Ibn Bajja [Avempace]”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Avempace › v. 1085–1138
Averroès
a influencé ✓
Averroes commented on almost all of Aristotle’s works, in short, middle and long commentaries, seeking to recover Aristotle’s own doctrine from later Neoplatonic additions. SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”; H. A. Davidson, Alfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes, on Intellect (1992)
Averroès › 1126–1198
Moïse Maïmonide
a influencé ✓
Maimonides accepted Aristotle’s account of the sublunary world as demonstrated, but held his arguments for the world’s eternity to be inconclusive (Guide of the Perplexed, c. 1190). Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed (c. 1190), tr. S. Pines (1963); SEP “Maimonides”
Moïse Maïmonide › 1138–1204
Albert le Grand
a influencé
Albert set out to make the whole of Aristotle intelligible to Latin readers in paraphrases of logic, physics, metaphysics, ethics and the life sciences, using Arabic commentators. Albertus Magnus, Physica I tr. 1 c. 1 (programme); SEP “Albert the Great”
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
Albert le Grand › v. 1200–1280
Nasir al-Din al-Tusi
a influencé
Al-Tusi’s Persian logic, The Foundation of Acquisition (Asas al-iqtibas, 1244), treats the whole Aristotelian Organon, including rhetoric and poetics. Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, Asas al-iqtibas (1244); Encyclopaedia Iranica “Asas al-eqtebas”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Nasir al-Din al-Tusi › 1201–1274
Roger Bacon
a influencé
Bacon was among the first masters to lecture on Aristotle’s natural philosophy and Metaphysics at Paris in the 1240s; his question commentaries from these years survive. Roger Bacon, Quaestiones supra libros Physicorum; Quaestiones supra Metaphysicam (Opera hactenus inedita); SEP “Roger Bacon”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Roger Bacon › v. 1219–1292
Siger de Brabant
a influencé ✓
Siger expounded Aristotle literally as a Paris arts master, reporting what the Philosopher held even where it conflicted with faith, as on the world’s eternity. Siger of Brabant, De aeternitate mundi; Quaestiones in tertium De anima; SEP “Siger of Brabant”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Siger de Brabant › v. 1240–1284
Jean Duns Scot
a influencé
Scotus took up Aristotle’s science of being as being and, siding with Avicenna, held that being is its subject and is said univocally of God and creatures. Duns Scotus, Quaestiones super libros Metaphysicorum I q. 1; Ordinatio I d. 3 p. 1 qq. 1–3; SEP “John Duns Scotus”
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
Jean Duns Scot › v. 1266–1308
Marsile de Padoue
a influencé
Marsilius built the first discourse of Defensor pacis (1324) on Aristotle’s Politics: the city exists for living and living well, and peace is like its health. Marsilius of Padua, Defensor pacis (1324), Discourse I; A. Gewirth, Marsilius of Padua and Medieval Political Philosophy (1951)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Marsile de Padoue › v. 1275–1342
Guillaume d’Ockham
a influencé ✓
Ockham commented on Aristotle’s logic and Physics and read the categories as classes of terms, admitting only substances and qualities as distinct things (Summa logicae, c. 1323). William of Ockham, Expositio in libros Physicorum; Summa logicae I (c. 1323); SEP “William of Ockham”
Guillaume d’Ockham › v. 1287–1347
Gersonide
a influencé
Gersonides argued as a strict Aristotelian in method and psychology, yet departed from Aristotle in arguing that the world had a beginning (The Wars of the Lord, 1329). Gersonides, Milhamot ha-Shem (1329); SEP “Gersonides”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Gersonide › 1288–1344
Jean Buridan
a influencé ✓
As a Paris arts master Buridan expounded most of Aristotle’s works in question commentaries, revising him within his framework, as with impetus in place of air pushing projectiles. John Buridan, Quaestiones super octo libros Physicorum VIII q. 12; SEP “John Buridan”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Jean Buridan › v. 1300–1360
Ibn Khaldoun
a influencé
Ibn Khaldun opened his science of civilisation with the philosophers’ dictum that the human being is political by nature, explained by the need for cooperation (Muqaddima, 1377). Ibn Khaldun, al-Muqaddima (1377), tr. F. Rosenthal (1958); Aristotle, Politics
Attestation: brouillon IA
Ibn Khaldoun › 1332–1406
Christine de Pizan
a influencé
Christine drew on Aristotle’s Politics in Nicole Oresme’s French translation for Le Livre du corps de policie (1406–07), alongside John of Salisbury. Christine de Pizan, Le Livre du corps de policie, ed. A. J. Kennedy (1998); N. Oresme, Le Livre de Politiques d’Aristote (1370s); S. Lefèvre, ‘Christine de Pizan et l’Aristote oresmien’, in proceedings of the 3rd International Christine de Pizan Colloquium (2000); K. L. Forhan, The Political Theory of Christine de Pizan (2002)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Christine de Pizan › v. 1364–1430
Pietro Pomponazzi
a influencé
Pomponazzi asked what Aristotle’s philosophy, read on its own terms, says about the soul, and concluded that it cannot prove immortality (De immortalitate animae, 1516). P. Pomponazzi, Tractatus de immortalitate animae (1516); SEP “Pietro Pomponazzi”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Pietro Pomponazzi › 1462–1525
Jean Pic de la Mirandole
a influencé
Pico held that Aristotle agrees with Plato in substance and argued this on being and the one in De ente et uno (1491). G. Pico della Mirandola, De ente et uno (1491); Conclusiones (1486); SEP “Giovanni Pico della Mirandola”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Jean Pic de la Mirandole › 1463–1494
Francisco Suárez
a influencé
Suárez’s Metaphysical Disputations (1597) treat Aristotle’s metaphysics no longer as a commentary but by topics, with an index matching his questions to Aristotle’s books. F. Suárez, Disputationes metaphysicae (1597), with the Index locupletissimus in Metaphysicam Aristotelis; SEP “Francisco Suárez”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Francisco Suárez › 1548–1617
Hugo Grotius
a influencé
Grotius placed Aristotle first among the philosophers and reworked his distributive and corrective justice into attributive and expletive justice (De jure belli ac pacis, 1625). H. Grotius, De jure belli ac pacis (1625), Prolegomena; I.1.8; IEP “Hugo Grotius”
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
Hugo Grotius › 1583–1645
Edmund Burke
a influencé ✓
Burke invoked Aristotle’s observation that a democracy has many points of resemblance with a tyranny against absolute democracy in revolutionary France (Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790). E. Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790); Aristotle, Politics IV.4
Edmund Burke › 1729–1797
Bernard Bolzano
a influencé
Commentators trace Bolzano’s objective relation of ground and consequence (Abfolge) among truths to Aristotle’s demonstrative science; unlike Aristotle, he admitted infinite chains of grounds (Wissenschaftslehre, 1837). B. Bolzano, Wissenschaftslehre (1837); S. Roski, Bolzano’s Conception of Grounding (2017); SEP “Bernard Bolzano”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Bernard Bolzano › 1781–1848
Karl Marx
a influencé
In Capital I (1867) Marx praised Aristotle’s analysis of the value form in exchange and traced its limit, missing labour as the substance of value, to Greek slavery. K. Marx, Das Kapital I (1867), on the form of value; Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book V; SEP “Karl Marx”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Karl Marx › 1818–1883
Franz Brentano
a influencé
Brentano began with Aristotle: his dissertation on the manifold senses of being (1862) and Die Psychologie des Aristoteles (1867) prepared his descriptive psychology of intentional acts. F. Brentano, Von der mannigfachen Bedeutung des Seienden nach Aristoteles (1862); Die Psychologie des Aristoteles (1867); SEP “Franz Brentano”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Franz Brentano › 1838–1917
Charles Sanders Peirce
a influencé
Peirce took his term ‘abduction’ for inference to an explanatory hypothesis from Aristotle’s apagoge in the Prior Analytics, setting it beside deduction and induction. Aristotle, Prior Analytics; SEP “Abduction”; SEP “Charles Sanders Peirce”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Charles Sanders Peirce › 1839–1914
Jan Łukasiewicz
a influencé
Łukasiewicz questioned Aristotle’s principle of contradiction (1910), drew three-valued logic from his problem of future contingents (1920) and axiomatised the syllogistic (Aristotle’s Syllogistic, 1951). J. Łukasiewicz, O zasadzie sprzeczności u Arystotelesa (1910); “O logice trójwartościowej”, Ruch Filozoficzny 5 (1920); Aristotle’s Syllogistic from the Standpoint of Modern Formal Logic (1951); SEP “Jan Łukasiewicz”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Jan Łukasiewicz › 1878–1956
Karl Polanyi
a influencé
In ‘Aristotle Discovers the Economy’ (1957) Polanyi read Aristotle’s distinction between householding and money-making as a response to markets beginning to disembed the economy from society. K. Polanyi, “Aristotle Discovers the Economy”, in K. Polanyi, C. M. Arensberg and H. W. Pearson (eds.), Trade and Market in the Early Empires (1957); Aristotle, Politics, Book I
Attestation: brouillon IA
Karl Polanyi › 1886–1964
Hans-Georg Gadamer
a influencé ✓
Gadamer took Aristotle’s practical wisdom (phronesis) as the model of hermeneutic application: understanding, like ethical knowledge, applies the general to a concrete situation (Truth and Method, 1960). H.-G. Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode (1960), “Die hermeneutische Aktualität des Aristoteles”; Die Idee des Guten zwischen Plato und Aristoteles (1978); SEP “Hans-Georg Gadamer”
Hans-Georg Gadamer › 1900–2002
Alfred Tarski
a influencé
Tarski presented his semantic definition of truth as a precise form of Aristotle’s formula ‘to say of what is that it is … is true’ (1944). A. Tarski, “The Semantic Conception of Truth and the Foundations of Semantics”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 4 (1944); Aristotle, Metaphysics IV (Γ); SEP “Tarski’s Truth Definitions”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Alfred Tarski › 1901–1983
Hannah Arendt
a influencé ✓
Arendt drew on Aristotle’s bios politikos and his distinction of praxis from poiesis in separating action from work and labour (The Human Condition, 1958). H. Arendt, The Human Condition (1958); SEP “Hannah Arendt”
Hannah Arendt › 1906–1975
John Langshaw Austin
a influencé ✓
Austin, trained as a classicist, read Aristotle closely and examined his concepts of the good and of happiness (‘Agathon and Eudaimonia in the Ethics of Aristotle’, publ. 1967). J. L. Austin, “Agathon and Eudaimonia in the Ethics of Aristotle”, in J. M. E. Moravcsik (ed.), Aristotle: A Collection of Critical Essays (1967); SEP “John Langshaw Austin”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
John Langshaw Austin › 1911–1960
Alexis Kagame
a influencé
Kagame read the grammar of Kinyarwanda as yielding four categories of being, which he compared with Aristotle’s ten (La Philosophie bantu-rwandaise de l’être, 1956). A. Kagame, La Philosophie bantu-rwandaise de l’être (1956); La Philosophie bantu comparée (1976)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Alexis Kagame › 1912–1981
Chaïm Perelman
a influencé
With Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca, Perelman revived Aristotle’s dialectical and rhetorical reasoning as a ‘new rhetoric’ of argumentation about values (Traité de l’argumentation, 1958). C. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, Traité de l’argumentation: La nouvelle rhétorique (1958)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Chaïm Perelman › 1912–1984
Paul Ricœur
a influencé
Ricœur built his theory of narrative on Aristotle’s Poetics, reading muthos as emplotment and mimesis as a threefold process (Time and Narrative I, 1983). P. Ricœur, Temps et récit I (1983); SEP “Paul Ricoeur”
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
Paul Ricœur › 1913–2005
G. E. M. Anscombe
a influencé ✓
Anscombe took Aristotle’s practical syllogism as a model of intentional action (Intention, 1957) and urged that ethics start from psychology and the virtues (‘Modern Moral Philosophy’, 1958). G. E. M. Anscombe, Intention (1957); “Modern Moral Philosophy”, Philosophy 33 (1958); SEP “Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret Anscombe”
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
G. E. M. Anscombe › 1919–2001
Mary Midgley
a influencé
Midgley defended, with Aristotle, a specific human nature whose characteristic needs and capacities set the conditions of a good human life (Beast and Man, 1978). M. Midgley, Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature (1978)
Attestation: aussi dans InPhO · InPhO
Mary Midgley › 1919–2018
Philippa Foot
a influencé ✓
Foot built on Aristotle’s link between virtue and the good of living things: human virtues are natural goodness relative to the human life form (Natural Goodness, 2001). P. Foot, Natural Goodness (2001); Virtues and Vices and Other Essays in Moral Philosophy (1978); SEP “Philippa Foot”
Philippa Foot › 1920–2010
Alasdair MacIntyre
a influencé
MacIntyre answered the choice ‘Nietzsche or Aristotle’ with Aristotle, recasting the virtues as excellences acquired within practices, narratives and traditions (After Virtue, 1981). A. MacIntyre, After Virtue (1981); SEP “Virtue Ethics”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Alasdair MacIntyre › 1929–2025
Bernard Williams
a influencé
Williams began ethics with Socrates’ question how one should live and examined Aristotle’s attempt to ground ethics in human well-being (Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, 1985). B. Williams, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (1985); Shame and Necessity (1993); SEP “Bernard Williams”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Bernard Williams › 1929–2003
Amartya Sen
a influencé
Sen cited Aristotle’s remark that wealth is merely useful for the sake of something else and linked capabilities to Aristotelian functioning (Development as Freedom, 1999). A. Sen, Development as Freedom (1999); “Capability and Well-Being”, in M. C. Nussbaum and A. Sen (eds.), The Quality of Life (1993); Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics I.5
Attestation: brouillon IA
Amartya Sen › né(e) en 1933
Kwame Gyekye
a influencé
Gyekye, trained in Greek and Arabic philosophy, translated Ibn al-Tayyib’s commentary on Porphyry’s Isagoge, the gateway to Aristotle’s logic (Arabic Logic, 1979). K. Gyekye (trans.), Arabic Logic: Ibn al-Tayyib’s Commentary on Porphyry’s Eisagoge (1979); An Essay on African Philosophical Thought (1987)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Kwame Gyekye › 1939–2019
Giorgio Agamben
a influencé
Agamben took from Aristotle the potentiality not to be (adynamia; ‘Bartleby, o della contingenza’, 1993) and the contrast of life and good life opening Homo Sacer (1995). G. Agamben, “Bartleby, o della contingenza”, in G. Deleuze and G. Agamben, Bartleby. La formula della creazione (1993); Homo sacer (1995); Aristotle, Metaphysics; Politics; SEP “Aristotle”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Giorgio Agamben › né(e) en 1942
Martha Craven Nussbaum
a influencé ✓
Nussbaum grounded her capabilities approach in Aristotle’s idea of human functioning (‘Nature, Function, and Capability’, 1988) and studied his ethics of fragile goods (The Fragility of Goodness, 1986). M. C. Nussbaum, The Fragility of Goodness (1986); “Nature, Function, and Capability: Aristotle on Political Distribution”, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, suppl. vol. (1988)
Attestation: aussi dans Wikidata · Wikidata
Martha Craven Nussbaum › né(e) en 1947
Christine Korsgaard
a influencé
Korsgaard compared Aristotle and Kant on the source of value (1986) and drew on Aristotle’s view of action and form in arguing that agents constitute themselves (Self-Constitution, 2009). C. M. Korsgaard, “Aristotle and Kant on the Source of Value”, Ethics 96 (1986); Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity (2009)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Christine Korsgaard › né(e) en 1952
Michael Sandel
a influencé
Sandel drew on Aristotle’s teleological reasoning – justice as allocating goods by their purpose – to question liberal neutrality (Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?, 2009). M. J. Sandel, Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do? (2009); The Case against Perfection (2007)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Michael Sandel › né(e) en 1953
Miranda Fricker
a influencé
Fricker modelled testimonial and hermeneutical justice as Aristotelian virtues of the hearer, a trained, second-nature sensibility that corrects prejudice in judging credibility (Epistemic Injustice, 2007). M. Fricker, Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing (2007)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Miranda Fricker › né(e) en 1966
Shannon Vallor
a influencé
Vallor modelled her ‘technomoral wisdom’ on Aristotle’s practical wisdom and used virtue ethics as a frame for living well with emerging technologies (Technology and the Virtues, 2016). S. Vallor, Technology and the Virtues: A Philosophical Guide to a Future Worth Wanting (2016)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Shannon Vallor › contemporain
Critique
Critiques reçues de 26
Jean Philopon a influencé
a influencé
Philoponus wrote commentaries on Aristotle’s Physics, On the Soul and logic and worked inside his framework while revising it, as with an impressed force for projectiles. Philoponus, In Physica; In De anima; In Analytica priora; SEP “John Philoponus”
Attestation: brouillon IA
critiqué par
Philoponus attacked Aristotle’s eternal world and fifth element (Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World) and explained projectile motion by an impressed force instead of the air. Philoponus, Contra Aristotelem (fragments, ed. C. Wildberg, 1987); In Physica 639–642 Vitelli; SEP “John Philoponus”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Jean Philopon › v. 490–570
Bartolomé de Las Casas a influencé
a influencé
At Valladolid (1550–51) Las Casas turned Aristotle against Sepúlveda, distinguishing kinds of barbarians to show that the Indigenous peoples were not natural slaves (Apologia, c. 1552). B. de las Casas, Apologia (c. 1552), trans. S. Poole, In Defense of the Indians (1974); L. Hanke, Aristotle and the American Indians (1959)
Attestation: brouillon IA
critiqué par
Against Sepúlveda at Valladolid (1550–51) Las Casas denied that Aristotle’s natural slavery applied to the peoples of America, who were fully capable of reason; in an earlier dispute he had bidden Aristotle farewell in the name of Christian charity. B. de Las Casas, Apologia (c. 1552); Historia de las Indias, book III (on the dispute of 1519); L. Hanke, Aristotle and the American Indians (1959)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Bartolomé de Las Casas › 1484–1566
Thomas Hobbes
critiqué par
Hobbes wrote that scarcely anything is more absurd than Aristotle’s Metaphysics or more repugnant to government than his Politics, attacking ‘separated essences’ (Leviathan, 1651, ch. 46). T. Hobbes, Leviathan (1651), ch. 46
Attestation: brouillon IA
Thomas Hobbes › 1588–1679
René Descartes
critiqué par
Descartes rejected the scholastic-Aristotelian substantial forms and real qualities, explaining nature by extension and motion and banishing final causes from physics (letter to Regius, January 1642; Meditations IV). Descartes to Regius, Jan. 1642 (AT III 491–510); Meditationes IV (AT VII 55); Principia philosophiae IV §§198–203; SEP “Descartes’ Physics”
Attestation: brouillon IA
René Descartes › 1596–1650
John Locke
critiqué par
Locke denied that Aristotle’s syllogism is the instrument of reasoning: God did not leave it ‘to Aristotle to make them rational’ (An Essay concerning Human Understanding, 1689). J. Locke, An Essay concerning Human Understanding (1689), IV.xvii.4
Attestation: brouillon IA
John Locke › 1632–1704
John Stuart Mill
critiqué par
Mill dismissed Aristotle’s categories as ‘a mere catalogue’ of everyday distinctions and held that the syllogism, taken as proof, begs the question (A System of Logic, 1843). J. S. Mill, A System of Logic (1843), book I, ch. 3; book II, ch. 3
Attestation: brouillon IA
John Stuart Mill › 1806–1873
Tout afficher (26)Afficher moins
Saadia Gaon
critiqué par
Saadia argued against the eternity of the world with proofs of creation and denied that Aristotle’s ten categories apply to God (Book of Beliefs and Opinions I–II, 933). Saadia Gaon, Kitāb al-amānāt wa-l-iʿtiqādāt (933) I–II, tr. S. Rosenblatt, 1948
Attestation: brouillon IA
Saadia Gaon › 882–942
Al-Biruni
critiqué par
In questions to Ibn Sina (c. 997) al-Biruni challenged Aristotle’s On the Heavens and Physics: why the heavens should be neither heavy nor light, why other worlds should be impossible, and why there could be no vacuum. al-Bīrūnī and Ibn Sīnā, al-Asʾila wa-l-ajwiba, ed. S. H. Nasr and M. Mohaghegh (1972); tr. R. Berjak and M. Iqbal, Islam & Science (2003–06)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Al-Biruni › 973–1048
Al-Ghazali
critiqué par
Al-Ghazali judged that Aristotle’s metaphysics, as transmitted by al-Farabi and Avicenna, contains unbelief, while accepting his logic as neutral (al-Munqidh min al-dalal, c. 1108). al-Ghazālī, al-Munqidh min al-ḍalāl, tr. R. J. McCarthy, Freedom and Fulfillment, 1980
Attestation: brouillon IA
Al-Ghazali › 1058–1111
Juda Halevi
critiqué par
Judah Halevi’s Kuzari sets the Aristotelian philosopher’s God, who knows nothing of individuals, against the God of revelation and history (Kuzari I.1–25, V.14). Judah Halevi, Kuzari (c. 1140) I.1–25, V.14; Y. Silman, Philosopher and Prophet, 1995
Attestation: brouillon IA
Juda Halevi › v. 1075–1141
Sohrawardi
critiqué par
Suhrawardi rejected the Peripatetic theory of definition by genus and differentia and their categories, grounding knowledge in illumination and presence (Hikmat al-ishraq, 1186). Suhrawardī, Ḥikmat al-ishrāq (1186), tr. J. Walbridge & H. Ziai, 1999; SEP “Suhrawardi”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Sohrawardi › 1154–1191
Bonaventure de Bagnoregio
critiqué par
Bonaventure blamed Aristotle for rejecting Plato’s exemplary ideas, from which errors such as the world’s eternity and the denial of providence follow (Collationes in Hexaemeron VI, 1273). Bonaventure, Collationes in Hexaemeron VI.2–5 (1273); In II Sententiarum d. 1 p. 1 a. 1 q. 2
Attestation: brouillon IA
Bonaventure de Bagnoregio › v. 1221–1274
Ibn Taymiyya
critiqué par
Ibn Taymiyya attacked Aristotelian logic: definitions cannot capture essences, and the syllogism yields no knowledge not available otherwise (al-Radd ala al-mantiqiyyin). Ibn Taymiyya, al-Radd ʿalā al-manṭiqiyyīn; W. Hallaq, Ibn Taymiyya against the Greek Logicians, 1993
Attestation: brouillon IA
Ibn Taymiyya › 1263–1328
Hasdaï Crescas
critiqué par
Crescas criticised Aristotle’s physics as Maimonides had summarised it, defending the possibility of an actual infinite, of void and of many worlds (Or Adonai I.2, 1410). Ḥasdai Crescas, Or Adonai (1410) I.2; H. A. Wolfson, Crescas’ Critique of Aristotle, 1929
Attestation: brouillon IA
Hasdaï Crescas › v. 1340–1411
Georges Gémiste Pléthon
critiqué par
Plethon argued in Florence in 1439 that Aristotle falls short of Plato, faulting him on God as creator, the Forms and the immortal soul (De differentiis). G. Gemistos Plethon, De differentiis (1439); C. M. Woodhouse, George Gemistos Plethon: The Last of the Hellenes, 1986
Attestation: brouillon IA
Georges Gémiste Pléthon › v. 1355–1452
Lorenzo Valla
critiqué par
Valla reduced Aristotle’s ten categories to three – substance, quality, action – and measured scholastic terms against classical Latin usage (Repastinatio dialectice et philosophie, c. 1439). L. Valla, Repastinatio dialectice et philosophie (c. 1439) I; SEP “Lorenzo Valla”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Lorenzo Valla › v. 1407–1457
Bernardino Telesio
critiqué par
Telesio replaced Aristotle’s form and matter with heat, cold and passive matter, studying nature ‘according to its own principles’ rather than by authority (De rerum natura, 1565). B. Telesio, De rerum natura iuxta propria principia (1565; 1586); SEP “Bernardino Telesio”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Bernardino Telesio › 1509–1588
Giordano Bruno
critiqué par
Bruno attacked Aristotle’s finite, geocentric cosmos, arguing for an infinite universe with innumerable worlds (De l’infinito, universo e mondi, 1584; Camoeracensis Acrotismus, 1588). G. Bruno, De l’infinito, universo e mondi (1584); Camoeracensis Acrotismus (1588); SEP “Giordano Bruno”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Giordano Bruno › 1548–1600
Francisco Sanches
critiqué par
Sanches attacked the Aristotelian ideal of science as demonstration from definitions and causes, concluding that nothing can be known with certainty (Quod nihil scitur, 1581). F. Sanches, Quod nihil scitur (1581), ed. E. Limbrick & D. F. S. Thomson, 1988
Attestation: brouillon IA
Francisco Sanches › 1551–1623
Francis Bacon
critiqué par
Bacon charged that Aristotle had corrupted natural philosophy with his dialectic, and set against the syllogism a method of gradual induction (Novum Organum, 1620, I.63). F. Bacon, Novum Organum (1620), I.11–14, I.54, I.63; SEP “Francis Bacon”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Francis Bacon › 1561–1626
Galilée
critiqué par
Galileo argued against Aristotle’s physics – that heavier bodies fall faster and the heavens cannot change – in the Dialogue (1632) and Two New Sciences (1638). Galileo, Dialogo sopra i due massimi sistemi (1632), Day 1; Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche (1638), Day 1; SEP “Galileo Galilei”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Galilée › 1564–1642
Tommaso Campanella
critiqué par
Campanella defended Telesio’s philosophy of nature against the Aristotelians, grounding knowledge in the senses rather than in Aristotle’s authority (Philosophia sensibus demonstrata, 1591). T. Campanella, Philosophia sensibus demonstrata (1591); SEP “Tommaso Campanella”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Tommaso Campanella › 1568–1639
Pierre Gassendi
critiqué par
In his Exercitationes paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos (1624) Gassendi attacked Aristotelian logic and physics as taught in the schools, later setting Epicurean atomism against them. P. Gassendi, Exercitationes paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos (1624); Syntagma philosophicum (1658); SEP “Pierre Gassendi”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Pierre Gassendi › 1592–1655
Montesquieu
critiqué par
Montesquieu faulted Aristotle for classifying monarchies not by the form of the constitution but by accidents such as the prince’s virtues or vices (De l’esprit des lois, 1748). Montesquieu, De l’esprit des lois (1748), XI.9 (“De la manière de penser d’Aristote”)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Montesquieu › 1689–1755
Xavier Zubiri
critiqué par
Zubiri rejected Aristotle’s conception of essence as the correlate of definition and of reality as substance, conceiving essence as the physical structure of things (Sobre la esencia, 1962). X. Zubiri, Sobre la esencia (1962); Inteligencia sentiente (1980)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Xavier Zubiri › 1898–1983
Karl Popper
critiqué par
Popper attacked Aristotle’s ‘methodological essentialism’, the search for definitions of essences, as a root of Hegelian historicism (The Open Society and Its Enemies, 1945). K. R. Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, vol. 2 (1945), ch. 11 (“The Aristotelian Roots of Hegelianism”)
Attestation: brouillon IA
Karl Popper › 1902–1994
Critiques adressées à 3
Héraclite
a critiqué
Aristotle objected to the claim, ascribed by some to Heraclitus, that the same thing is and is not: the principle of non-contradiction makes it unbelievable (Metaphysics IV). Aristotle, Metaphysics IV.3, 1005b23–26; IV.7, 1012a24–26; SEP “Heraclitus”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Héraclite › v. 535–475 av. J.-C.
Parménide
a critiqué
Aristotle objected that Parmenides’ argument for a single unchanging being fails because ‘being’ is said in many ways (Physics I.2–3). Aristotle, Physics I.2–3, 184b–187a; Metaphysics I.5, 986b
Attestation: brouillon IA
Parménide › v. 515–450 av. J.-C.
Platon élève de
élève de ✓
Attested by Aristotle himself, who counts himself among the Platonists (‘we’, Metaphysics I.9, 990b9–17; ‘friends of ours’, Nicomachean Ethics I.6, 1096a11–17); his twenty years in the Academy are reported by later biographers (Diogenes Laertius 5.9). Aristotle, Metaphysics I.9, 990b9–17; Nicomachean Ethics I.6, 1096a11–17; Diogenes Laertius 5.9
a critiqué
Aristotle criticised Plato’s separate Forms for explaining neither change nor knowledge – ‘empty words and poetic metaphors’ – and rejected a single Form of the Good. Aristotle, Metaphysics I.9, 990b–991b; Nicomachean Ethics I.6, 1096a11–1097a14; SEP “Aristotle’s Metaphysics”
Attestation: brouillon IA
Platon › 428–348 av. J.-C.
Œuvres
- v. 350 av. J.-C.De l’âme
L’âme comme forme du corps vivant.
- v. 350 av. J.-C.Organon
Les écrits logiques : catégories, syllogistique, théorie de la démonstration.
- v. 350 av. J.-C.Physique
Mouvement, temps, lieu et les quatre causes.
- v. 340 av. J.-C.Métaphysique
L’être en tant qu’être, la substance et le moteur immobile – avec une critique des Idées de Platon.
- v. 340 av. J.-C.Éthique à Nicomaque
Le bonheur (eudaimonia) comme activité vertueuse ; la vertu comme juste milieu ; la sagesse pratique.
- v. 335 av. J.-C.Poétique
Tragédie, mimèsis et catharsis – une réponse à la critique des poètes par Platon.
- v. 335 av. J.-C.Politique
L’être humain comme animal politique (zoon politikon) ; une comparaison des constitutions.
Position
Aristote fit redescendre les Formes de Platon sur terre : la forme n’existe pas dans un royaume séparé, mais dans les choses individuelles, comme la structure qui fait de la matière ce cheval-ci ou cette maison-ci. Pour expliquer quoi que ce soit, on cherche quatre causes – la matière, la forme, la cause motrice et la fin. La nature est orientée vers des buts ; les êtres vivants tendent à réaliser leur potentiel. En éthique, le but de la vie est l’eudaimonia, l’épanouissement par l’exercice des vertus, dont chacune est un juste milieu entre deux extrêmes. Il fonda la logique formelle, systématisa la biologie, la politique et la poétique, et fut pour les penseurs médiévaux de l’islam et de la chrétienté simplement « le Philosophe ». Sa Politique défendait aussi l’« esclavage par nature » et soutenait que la capacité de délibérer de la femme « manque d’autorité » – des vues qui servirent plus tard à justifier l’asservissement colonial (Sepúlveda) et furent longtemps contestées.
Vie et contexte
Aristote naquit à Stagire, dans le nord de la Grèce, fils d’un médecin de la cour macédonienne. Il étudia pendant vingt ans à l’Académie de Platon, fut ensuite le précepteur du jeune Alexandre le Grand et fonda en 335 av. J.-C. sa propre école à Athènes, le Lycée. Après la mort d’Alexandre, il quitta Athènes et mourut un an plus tard à Chalcis.
Apparaît dans
- Voyage « Du mythos au logos » · Étape 8 sur 8
- Voyage « Le voyage d’Aristote » · Étape 1 sur 9
- Voyage « Qu’est-ce qui est juste ? » · Étape 2 sur 10
- Voyage « L’énigme de la conscience » · Étape 3 sur 10
État en novembre 2026 · Sources · Améliorer cette page · Comment Agora est faite