Aristotle and Evil

[Ed Cryer]

Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine is in
machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It seems healthier
and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of middle-class bourgeoisie
in it; I mean the money-grubbers who exploit markets and human greed to
make money, and infect our society with their ignoble mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders; or in one
of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman in a navy trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and scammers
here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural criminals.
You talk a great deal about the social conditioning of people
(especially the family situation), but we are not all born equal. And
the deterrent against the criminal types has to be a strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The resentment
carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry for you all. Look at
Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent methods to keep them down,
and there are constant rebellions arising. In Athens you don't have
that, but there is a very noticeable gap between rich and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And free
education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional idiot
with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots in the
Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.

Ed

[John W Kennedy]

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine is in
machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It seems healthier
and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of middle-class bourgeoisie
in it; I mean the money-grubbers who exploit markets and human greed to
make money, and infect our society with their ignoble mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders; or in
one of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman in a navy
trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and scammers
here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural criminals.
You talk a great deal about the social conditioning of people
(especially the family situation), but we are not all born equal. And
the deterrent against the criminal types has to be a strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The resentment
carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry for you all. Look
at Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent methods to keep them
down, and there are constant rebellions arising. In Athens you don't
have that, but there is a very noticeable gap between rich and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And free
education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional idiot
with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots in the
Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.

Don't forget that when Aristotle spoke of "natural slaves" he was
speaking of the sort of person who, when he hears the words "liberal
arts", snorts, "Hey, 'Would you like fries with that?'"

[Bill C]

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine is in
machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It seems healthier
and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of middle-class bourgeoisie
in it; I mean the money-grubbers who exploit markets and human greed to
make money, and infect our society with their ignoble mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders; or in one
of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman in a navy trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and scammers
here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural criminals.
You talk a great deal about the social conditioning of people
(especially the family situation), but we are not all born equal. And
the deterrent against the criminal types has to be a strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The resentment
carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry for you all. Look at
Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent methods to keep them down,
and there are constant rebellions arising. In Athens you don't have
that, but there is a very noticeable gap between rich and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And free
education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional idiot
with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots in the
Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.
Ed

Wouldn't Aristotle consider evil a "privation"? If that is its' own
substance. I know Aquinas says evil has no existence in and of its self.
But simply a lack of something.
B

[Ed Cryer]

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine is in
machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It seems healthier
and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of middle-class
bourgeoisie in it; I mean the money-grubbers who exploit markets and
human greed to make money, and infect our society with their ignoble
mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders; or in
one of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman in a navy
trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and scammers
here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural criminals.
You talk a great deal about the social conditioning of people
(especially the family situation), but we are not all born equal. And
the deterrent against the criminal types has to be a strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The resentment
carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry for you all. Look
at Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent methods to keep them
down, and there are constant rebellions arising. In Athens you don't
have that, but there is a very noticeable gap between rich and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And free
education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional idiot
with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots in the
Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.
Ed

Wouldn't Aristotle consider evil a "privation"? If that is its' own
substance. I know Aquinas says evil has no existence in and of its self.
But simply a lack of something.
B

Did he never link it with ethics? Or social mores?

Ed

[Bill C]

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine is in
machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It seems healthier
and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of middle-class
bourgeoisie in it; I mean the money-grubbers who exploit markets and
human greed to make money, and infect our society with their ignoble
mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders; or in
one of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman in a navy
trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and scammers
here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural criminals.
You talk a great deal about the social conditioning of people
(especially the family situation), but we are not all born equal. And
the deterrent against the criminal types has to be a strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The resentment
carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry for you all. Look
at Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent methods to keep them
down, and there are constant rebellions arising. In Athens you don't
have that, but there is a very noticeable gap between rich and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And free
education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional idiot
with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots in the
Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.
Ed

Wouldn't Aristotle consider evil a "privation"? If that is its' own
substance. I know Aquinas says evil has no existence in and of its
self. But simply a lack of something.
B

Did he never link it with ethics? Or social mores?
Ed

IDK I have never got into that part of Aristotle. You are supposed to
learn grammer which in philosophical context I never got into. Then
Interpretations and categories after the logic you go right into
metaphysics. Since the scholastics such as Aquinas draw from Aristotle,
I look into them. I never looked at Neomachian ethics. But I am assuming
Aristotle would not call "evil" a substance, certainly not a primary
substance. Perhaps a quality. Aquinas might mention this, as to whether
or not evil is a substance on any level, any kind of substance.
B

[Ed Cryer]

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine is in
machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It seems
healthier and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of
middle-class bourgeoisie in it; I mean the money-grubbers who
exploit markets and human greed to make money, and infect our
society with their ignoble mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders; or in
one of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman in a navy
trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and scammers
here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural
criminals. You talk a great deal about the social conditioning of
people (especially the family situation), but we are not all born
equal. And the deterrent against the criminal types has to be a
strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The resentment
carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry for you all.
Look at Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent methods to keep
them down, and there are constant rebellions arising. In Athens you
don't have that, but there is a very noticeable gap between rich and
poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And free
education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional
idiot with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots in
the Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.
Ed

Wouldn't Aristotle consider evil a "privation"? If that is its' own
substance. I know Aquinas says evil has no existence in and of its
self. But simply a lack of something.
B

Did he never link it with ethics? Or social mores?
Ed

IDK I have never got into that part of Aristotle. You are supposed to
learn grammer which in philosophical context I never got into. Then
Interpretations and categories after the logic you go right into
metaphysics. Since the scholastics such as Aquinas draw from Aristotle,
I look into them. I never looked at Neomachian ethics. But I am assuming
Aristotle would not call "evil" a substance, certainly not a primary
substance. Perhaps a quality. Aquinas might mention this, as to whether
or not evil is a substance on any level, any kind of substance.
B

Metaphysics always strikes me as a game, or a pastime; something akin to
chess or crosswords, interesting but of no practical value.

I have a vaguely Christian humanist view of evil; malign human intention
against others of the species.

The Nichomachean Ethics is very much to my taste; more replete with
common sense than what Friedrich Nietzsche called Gedankenspinne.

Ed

[Bill C]

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine is
in machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It seems
healthier and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of
middle-class bourgeoisie in it; I mean the money-grubbers who
exploit markets and human greed to make money, and infect our
society with their ignoble mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders; or
in one of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman in a
navy trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and
scammers here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher
life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural
criminals. You talk a great deal about the social conditioning of
people (especially the family situation), but we are not all born
equal. And the deterrent against the criminal types has to be a
strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The resentment
carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry for you all.
Look at Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent methods to keep
them down, and there are constant rebellions arising. In Athens you
don't have that, but there is a very noticeable gap between rich
and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And free
education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional
idiot with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots in
the Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.
Ed

Wouldn't Aristotle consider evil a "privation"? If that is its' own
substance. I know Aquinas says evil has no existence in and of its
self. But simply a lack of something.
B

Did he never link it with ethics? Or social mores?
Ed

IDK I have never got into that part of Aristotle. You are supposed to
learn grammer which in philosophical context I never got into. Then
Interpretations and categories after the logic you go right into
metaphysics. Since the scholastics such as Aquinas draw from
Aristotle, I look into them. I never looked at Neomachian ethics. But
I am assuming Aristotle would not call "evil" a substance, certainly
not a primary substance. Perhaps a quality. Aquinas might mention
this, as to whether or not evil is a substance on any level, any kind
of substance.
B

Metaphysics always strikes me as a game, or a pastime; something akin to
chess or crosswords, interesting but of no practical value.
I have a vaguely Christian humanist view of evil; malign human intention
against others of the species.
The Nichomachean Ethics is very much to my taste; more replete with
common sense than what Friedrich Nietzsche called Gedankenspinne.
Ed

I always looked at it as thus, no possible question cannot be answered
with metaphysics or ontology. For example the substance "Cancer". What
it is? Where it's from, what eliminates it, or how it eliminates you.
Can all be answered by the substantial theory.
B

[Ed Cryer]

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine is
in machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It seems
healthier and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of
middle-class bourgeoisie in it; I mean the money-grubbers who
exploit markets and human greed to make money, and infect our
society with their ignoble mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders; or
in one of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman in a
navy trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and
scammers here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher
life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural
criminals. You talk a great deal about the social conditioning of
people (especially the family situation), but we are not all born
equal. And the deterrent against the criminal types has to be a
strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The resentment
carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry for you all.
Look at Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent methods to
keep them down, and there are constant rebellions arising. In
Athens you don't have that, but there is a very noticeable gap
between rich and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And
free education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional
idiot with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots in
the Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.
Ed

Wouldn't Aristotle consider evil a "privation"? If that is its' own
substance. I know Aquinas says evil has no existence in and of its
self. But simply a lack of something.
B

Did he never link it with ethics? Or social mores?
Ed

IDK I have never got into that part of Aristotle. You are supposed to
learn grammer which in philosophical context I never got into. Then
Interpretations and categories after the logic you go right into
metaphysics. Since the scholastics such as Aquinas draw from
Aristotle, I look into them. I never looked at Neomachian ethics. But
I am assuming Aristotle would not call "evil" a substance, certainly
not a primary substance. Perhaps a quality. Aquinas might mention
this, as to whether or not evil is a substance on any level, any kind
of substance.
B

Metaphysics always strikes me as a game, or a pastime; something akin
to chess or crosswords, interesting but of no practical value.
I have a vaguely Christian humanist view of evil; malign human
intention against others of the species.
The Nichomachean Ethics is very much to my taste; more replete with
common sense than what Friedrich Nietzsche called Gedankenspinne.
Ed

I always looked at it as thus, no possible question cannot be answered
with metaphysics or ontology. For example the substance "Cancer". What
it is? Where it's from, what eliminates it, or how it eliminates you.
Can all be answered by the substantial theory.
B

You seem better qualified than me for conversing with Aristotle. You
exhibit more of his conceptual framework.
Ask him if he still believes in the geocentric theory of the universe;
or perfect circles for the planets. Does he still reject the atomic
theory of matter? Are comets still a ball of fire rather than a block of
ice?

Ed

[Bill C]

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine is
in machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It seems
healthier and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of
middle-class bourgeoisie in it; I mean the money-grubbers who
exploit markets and human greed to make money, and infect our
society with their ignoble mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders; or
in one of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman in
a navy trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and
scammers here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher
life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural
criminals. You talk a great deal about the social conditioning of
people (especially the family situation), but we are not all born
equal. And the deterrent against the criminal types has to be a
strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The resentment
carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry for you all.
Look at Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent methods to
keep them down, and there are constant rebellions arising. In
Athens you don't have that, but there is a very noticeable gap
between rich and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And
free education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional
idiot with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots in
the Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.
Ed

Wouldn't Aristotle consider evil a "privation"? If that is its'
own substance. I know Aquinas says evil has no existence in and of
its self. But simply a lack of something.
B

Did he never link it with ethics? Or social mores?
Ed

IDK I have never got into that part of Aristotle. You are supposed
to learn grammer which in philosophical context I never got into.
Then Interpretations and categories after the logic you go right
into metaphysics. Since the scholastics such as Aquinas draw from
Aristotle, I look into them. I never looked at Neomachian ethics.
But I am assuming Aristotle would not call "evil" a substance,
certainly not a primary substance. Perhaps a quality. Aquinas might
mention this, as to whether or not evil is a substance on any level,
any kind of substance.
B

Metaphysics always strikes me as a game, or a pastime; something akin
to chess or crosswords, interesting but of no practical value.
I have a vaguely Christian humanist view of evil; malign human
intention against others of the species.
The Nichomachean Ethics is very much to my taste; more replete with
common sense than what Friedrich Nietzsche called Gedankenspinne.
Ed

I always looked at it as thus, no possible question cannot be answered
with metaphysics or ontology. For example the substance "Cancer". What
it is? Where it's from, what eliminates it, or how it eliminates you.
Can all be answered by the substantial theory.
B

You seem better qualified than me for conversing with Aristotle. You
exhibit more of his conceptual framework.
Ask him if he still believes in the geocentric theory of the universe;

As far as geocentric I certainly believe in it :) In regards to what
Aristotle is saying anyway. The sublunar realm as he meant it, is
indeed, much different than the higher realms.

In regards to the literal meaning of Heliocentrism, they couldn't
have known that the sun was at the center of the solar system, not that
as far as his arguments, would heliocentricism be valid, I wouldn't
think. He was digging into the higher realms not the literal
heliocentric scientific model for his purposes.

Atomism he claimed to reject, of course, at some level. As far as
comets they would have to be a fire. Or any of the other 3 primary
qualities, water, earth, or air. As ice is a mixture of cold and water
in varying degrees, that gives qualities of "hardness".

Post by Ed Cryer
or perfect circles for the planets. Does he still reject the atomic
theory of matter? Are comets still a ball of fire rather than a block of
ice?
Ed

Cheers

[Ed Cryer]

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine
is in machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It
seems healthier and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of
middle-class bourgeoisie in it; I mean the money-grubbers who
exploit markets and human greed to make money, and infect our
society with their ignoble mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders;
or in one of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an oarsman
in a navy trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and
scammers here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher
life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural
criminals. You talk a great deal about the social conditioning
of people (especially the family situation), but we are not all
born equal. And the deterrent against the criminal types has to
be a strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The
resentment carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry
for you all. Look at Sparta and their helots. They use abhorrent
methods to keep them down, and there are constant rebellions
arising. In Athens you don't have that, but there is a very
noticeable gap between rich and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And
free education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional
idiot with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots
in the Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.
Ed

Wouldn't Aristotle consider evil a "privation"? If that is its'
own substance. I know Aquinas says evil has no existence in and
of its self. But simply a lack of something.
B

Did he never link it with ethics? Or social mores?
Ed

IDK I have never got into that part of Aristotle. You are supposed
to learn grammer which in philosophical context I never got into.
Then Interpretations and categories after the logic you go right
into metaphysics. Since the scholastics such as Aquinas draw from
Aristotle, I look into them. I never looked at Neomachian ethics.
But I am assuming Aristotle would not call "evil" a substance,
certainly not a primary substance. Perhaps a quality. Aquinas might
mention this, as to whether or not evil is a substance on any
level, any kind of substance.
B

Metaphysics always strikes me as a game, or a pastime; something
akin to chess or crosswords, interesting but of no practical value.
I have a vaguely Christian humanist view of evil; malign human
intention against others of the species.
The Nichomachean Ethics is very much to my taste; more replete with
common sense than what Friedrich Nietzsche called Gedankenspinne.
Ed

I always looked at it as thus, no possible question cannot be
answered with metaphysics or ontology. For example the substance
"Cancer". What it is? Where it's from, what eliminates it, or how it
eliminates you. Can all be answered by the substantial theory.
B

You seem better qualified than me for conversing with Aristotle. You
exhibit more of his conceptual framework.
Ask him if he still believes in the geocentric theory of the universe;

As far as geocentric I certainly believe in it :) In regards to what
Aristotle is saying anyway. The sublunar realm as he meant it, is
indeed, much different than the higher realms.
  In regards to the literal meaning of Heliocentrism, they couldn't
have known that the sun was at the center of the solar system, not that
as far as his arguments, would heliocentricism be valid, I wouldn't
think. He was digging into the higher realms not the literal
heliocentric scientific model for his purposes.
    Atomism he claimed to reject, of course, at some level. As far as
comets they would have to be a fire. Or any of the other 3 primary
qualities, water, earth, or air. As ice is a mixture of cold and water
in varying degrees, that gives qualities of "hardness".

Post by Ed Cryer
or perfect circles for the planets. Does he still reject the atomic
theory of matter? Are comets still a ball of fire rather than a block
of ice?
Ed

Cheers

The human brain directs us rather than vice versa. Try as we might to
master our genes and instincts, it's the boss.
I used to think that what the SS guards made the Jewish Sonderkommandos
do at Auschwitz was the very pinnacle of human evil, but things like
this famous illusion put our brains in the dock;
https

[Bill C]

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by Bill C

Post by Ed Cryer
Ed: A great difference, Aristotle, between your world and mine
is in machines and devices. I somehow prefer your world. It
seems healthier and fitter to me. And it contains far fewer of
middle-class bourgeoisie in it; I mean the money-grubbers who
exploit markets and human greed to make money, and infect our
society with their ignoble mores.
Aristotle: You should spend a few days with the slave-traders;
or in one of the silver mines at Laurium. Or maybe as an
oarsman in a navy trireme.
Ed: Point taken, yes. And I suppose you have tricksters and
scammers here too. Life feeds on life; low-life feeds on higher
life forms.
Aristotle: There are natural slaves, and there are natural
criminals. You talk a great deal about the social conditioning
of people (especially the family situation), but we are not all
born equal. And the deterrent against the criminal types has to
be a strong policing force.
Ed: There's class conditioning here in Athens too. The
resentment carried by people at the bottom is a constant worry
for you all. Look at Sparta and their helots. They use
abhorrent methods to keep them down, and there are constant
rebellions arising. In Athens you don't have that, but there is
a very noticeable gap between rich and poor.
How would you feel about lessening that gap?
Aristotle: What do you mean?
Ed: Well, what if everybody over a certain age had a vote? And
free education for every child?
Aristotle: You mean women and children dictating fashions in public life?
Ed: Yes, but only as part of the full electorate.
Aristotle: I'd hate it. We'd end up with silliness predominating.
Ed: Some important government offices are filled here by simple
lot-drawing; and surely that sometimes gives you the occasional
idiot with power. As well as the demagogues who call the shots
in the Assembly, and drag along hordes of uneducated people.
Aristotle: You'll be asking me to give the vote to slaves next.
Ed

Wouldn't Aristotle consider evil a "privation"? If that is its'
own substance. I know Aquinas says evil has no existence in and
of its self. But simply a lack of something.
B

Did he never link it with ethics? Or social mores?
Ed

IDK I have never got into that part of Aristotle. You are supposed
to learn grammer which in philosophical context I never got into.
Then Interpretations and categories after the logic you go right
into metaphysics. Since the scholastics such as Aquinas draw from
Aristotle, I look into them. I never looked at Neomachian ethics.
But I am assuming Aristotle would not call "evil" a substance,
certainly not a primary substance. Perhaps a quality. Aquinas
might mention this, as to whether or not evil is a substance on
any level, any kind of substance.
B

Metaphysics always strikes me as a game, or a pastime; something
akin to chess or crosswords, interesting but of no practical value.
I have a vaguely Christian humanist view of evil; malign human
intention against others of the species.
The Nichomachean Ethics is very much to my taste; more replete with
common sense than what Friedrich Nietzsche called Gedankenspinne.
Ed

I always looked at it as thus, no possible question cannot be
answered with metaphysics or ontology. For example the substance
"Cancer". What it is? Where it's from, what eliminates it, or how it
eliminates you. Can all be answered by the substantial theory.
B

You seem better qualified than me for conversing with Aristotle. You
exhibit more of his conceptual framework.
Ask him if he still believes in the geocentric theory of the universe;

As far as geocentric I certainly believe in it :) In regards to what
Aristotle is saying anyway. The sublunar realm as he meant it, is
indeed, much different than the higher realms.
   In regards to the literal meaning of Heliocentrism, they couldn't
have known that the sun was at the center of the solar system, not
that as far as his arguments, would heliocentricism be valid, I
wouldn't think. He was digging into the higher realms not the literal
heliocentric scientific model for his purposes.
     Atomism he claimed to reject, of course, at some level. As far as
comets they would have to be a fire. Or any of the other 3 primary
qualities, water, earth, or air. As ice is a mixture of cold and water
in varying degrees, that gives qualities of "hardness".

Post by Ed Cryer
or perfect circles for the planets. Does he still reject the atomic
theory of matter? Are comets still a ball of fire rather than a block
of ice?
Ed

Cheers

The human brain directs us rather than vice versa. Try as we might to
master our genes and instincts, it's the boss.
I used to think that what the SS guards made the Jewish Sonderkommandos
do at Auschwitz was the very pinnacle of human evil, but things like
this famous illusion put our brains in the dock;
https://tinyurl.com/pmokah8
Ed

Perfect circles for the planets is because they are perfect and the
perfect shape is the sphere. SO we may discover in some way beyond what
we see as the solar system the planets are associated with perfect
spheres. I don't know necessarily that we was talking about orbits. And
the earth and man is at the center of the universe since we are here and
not on the Sun. The idea is that man "is at the center of the universe",
indeed.
cheers