Another Kind of Knowledge Aristotle's Phronêsis from an Epistemological Point of View Michael ...

287 Pages·2015·3.15 MB·English

by  Michael Hertig

Unicentre
CH-1015 Lausanne
http://serval.unil.ch
Year : 2015
Another Kind of Knowledge
Aristotle's Phronêsis from an Epistemological Point of View
Michael Hertig
Michael Hertig, 2015, Another Kind of Knowledge. Aristotle's Phronêsis from an Epistemological
Point of View
Originally published at : Thesis, University of Lausanne
Posted at the University of Lausanne Open Archive http://serval.unil.ch
Document URN : urn:nbn:ch:serval-BIB_C012F1902BDD1
Droits d’auteur
L'Université de Lausanne attire expressément l'attention des utilisateurs sur le fait que tous les
documents publiés dans l'Archive SERVAL sont protégés par le droit d'auteur, conformément à la
loi fédérale sur le droit d'auteur et les droits voisins (LDA). A ce titre, il est indispensable d'obtenir
le consentement préalable de l'auteur et/ou de l’éditeur avant toute utilisation d'une oeuvre ou
d'une partie d'une oeuvre ne relevant pas d'une utilisation à des fins personnelles au sens de la
LDA (art. 19, al. 1 lettre a). A défaut, tout contrevenant s'expose aux sanctions prévues par cette
loi. Nous déclinons toute responsabilité en la matière.
Copyright
The University of Lausanne expressly draws the attention of users to the fact that all documents
published in the SERVAL Archive are protected by copyright in accordance with federal law on
copyright and similar rights (LDA). Accordingly it is indispensable to obtain prior consent from the
author and/or publisher before any use of a work or part of a work for purposes other than
personal use within the meaning of LDA (art. 19, para. 1 letter a). Failure to do so will expose
offenders to the sanctions laid down by this law. We accept no liability in this respect.
FACULTÉ DES LETTRES
SECTION DE PHILOSOPHIE
Another Kind of Knowledge
Aristotle's Phronêsis from an Epistemological Point of View
THÈSE DE DOCTORAT
présentée à la
Faculté des lettres
de l’Université de Lausanne
pour l’obtention du grade de
Docteur ès lettres
par
Michael Hertig
Directeur de thèse
Prof. Alexandrine Schniewind
Jury
Prof. Simone Zurbuchen (Université de Lausanne), présidente
Prof. Richard King (Universität Bern)
Prof. Martin Pickavé (University of Toronto)
Prof. Susan Sauvé Meyer (University of Pennsylvania)

!"ὶ $ὸ &’()’ῖ+ ,-$ὲ /0ά,$’2 ,)ὸ3 ὑ5ί’2"+
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics VII.12 1153a20
"The more you know who you are and what you want, the less you let
things upset you".
Bob Harris (Bill Murray) in Lost in Translation, by Sophia Coppola, 2003.

Acknowledgments
This dissertation is the result of seven years of work during which I always
benefited from excellent working conditions. I am grateful to all the academic insti-
tutions that trusted my research project. First, I had the opportunity to work as a
teaching assistant at the Philosophy Department of the University of Lausanne
from 2008 to 2012, plus an extra semester in Autumn 2013. This position provided
me with a generous amount of time to work on my dissertation. Then, during the
academic year 2012-2013, I benefited from a scholarship of the Swiss National
Foundation for Science (SNF). I had the honour to spend this year at the Philosophy
Department of the University of Toronto in the Collaborative Program in Ancient
and Medieval Philosophy. There I could take profit of the vivid intellectual life of
the Department as well as make connections with outstanding people. Finally, dur-
ing the last year of my project, I had the chance to receive subsides from the Société
Académique Vaudoise and from the Fondation VanWalsem. This extra push
helped me finishing the redaction of this dissertation.
Most importantly, I want to thank all the people who helped me bring this
work to an end. My gratitude goes first to my advisor Alexandrine Schniewind
who trusted me from the beginning and followed me until the end. Her support
and encouragements were decisive in times of doubts and despair.
I want to thank Sarah Broadie, Roberto Grasso, Hasse Hämäläinen, and
Theodor Scaltsas, whom I had the pleasure to meet during a short stay in Scotland
in April 2011. Their comments and insight were crucial at an early stage of this pro-
ject. Prof. Scaltsas also agreed to be one of my referees for the SNF application.
In Toronto, I benefited from discussions with Ian Drummond, Brad Inwood,
Juan Piñeros, and Jennifer Whiting. I've learned a lot thanks to their expertise. Spe-
cial thanks go to Martin Pickavé, who helped me prepare the grant application for
the SNF and was my supervisor in Toronto. He then showed an invaluable help
during my stay there, introducing me to Canadian life. Above all, I want to thank
him for his availability to discuss the advance of my work, even long after I had left
Toronto.
Katerina Ierodiakonou agreed to read an early version of chapter 2. Thanks
to her pervasive comments I could avoid gross mistakes at a key moment in the
redaction process. Patrice Soom read an early version of chapter 4, and Maël Goar-
zin of chapter 5. Their thoughtful comments and suggestions helped me developing
my ideas. James Allen and David Charles were kind enough to send me papers of
theirs that I did not have access to. Christophe Erismann agreed to be one of my
referees for my SNF application. I also benefited from advice by Georg Von Arburg,
who was representative for the Faculté des Lettres at the SNF commission, as well
as from Jérôme Meizoz. Prof. Von Arburg and Meizoz helped me better outlining
my project. Alex Bown, Claire Balbo, Ian Drummond, Nathalie Glanville, Chad
Jorgenson and Alexandra Trotsenko accepted to proofread parts of this work. Their
attentiveness improved the quality of this thesis a lot.
I am deeply grateful to Martin Pickavé, Susan Sauvé-Meyer and Richard
King, who agreed to sit in my thesis committee. They all provided me with chal-
lenging, and yet motivating, criticism.
I want to thank all the people, colleagues, and friends who surrounded me
during all these years. They all contributed in helping me making it through. In
particular, I received much support from Rim Essafi, Kelly Harrison, Christian
Sachse, and Martine VonLanthen, with whom I could share my frustrations, my
doubts and my ras-le-bol.
Last but far from least, all my gratitude and love goes to Sasha, who sup-
ported – and tolerated – me throughout these years.
6
Contents
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................... 5

Contents ................................................................................................................................. 7

List of Aristotle's works and abbreviations ...................................................................... 9

1
  Introduction ................................................................................................................. 11

1.1
  Aristotle and practical knowledge ..................................................................... 11

1.2
  Status quæstionis .................................................................................................. 13

1.3
  Main thesis and summary of the chapters ........................................................ 21

1.4
  Terminological clarifications ............................................................................... 25

2
  Practical knowledge as an aspect of phronêsis ...................................................... 29

2.1
  Introduction ........................................................................................................... 29

2.2
  Knowledge in a practical context ....................................................................... 31

2.3
  A first approximation of practical knowledge ................................................. 35

2.4
  The rational side of moral action ........................................................................ 40

2.4.1
  The project of Nicomachean Ethics book VI ................................................. 40

2.4.2
  The practical/theoretical distinction .......................................................... 47

2.4.3
  The function of practical reason .................................................................. 51

2.5
  Aristotle's definition of phronêsis ........................................................................ 57

2.6
  Is phronêsis practical knowledge? ....................................................................... 64

2.7
  Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 68

3
  The rational structure of practical knowledge ...................................................... 71

3.1
  Introduction ........................................................................................................... 71

3.2
  The structure of theoretical thought .................................................................. 74

3.2.1
  Theoretical thought as epistêmê ................................................................... 74

3.2.2
  Theoretical thought as a process of investigation .................................... 79

3.3
  The structure of practical thought ...................................................................... 85

3.3.1
  Practical rationality as a process of inquiry: deliberation ....................... 85

3.3.2
  Practical thinking as an argument .............................................................. 90

3.3.2.1
  EN VI.9 1142b17-26 ................................................................................ 91

3.3.2.2
  EN VI.12 1144a31-b1 .............................................................................. 97

3.3.2.3
  EN VI.7-8 (Bekker EN VI.8-9) ............................................................. 100

3.4
  Structural differences between practical and theoretical thought .............. 107

3.5
  Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 111

4
  The content of decision ............................................................................................ 113

4.1
  Introduction ......................................................................................................... 113

4.2
  The content of decision: the orthos logos .......................................................... 115

4.3
  Knowledge of universals in the Ethics ............................................................. 118

4.3.1
  The form of knowledge of universals ...................................................... 119

4.3.2
  Virtue gives the end .................................................................................... 121

4.3.3
  Deliberation and specification of the end ................................................ 127

4.4
  Knowledge of the particulars ........................................................................... 134

4.4.1
  Particulars as the circumstances of the situation .................................... 137

4.4.2
  Particular knowledge makes the agent praktikôteros .............................. 144

4.5
  Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 152

5
  The epistemic basis of practical knowledge ........................................................ 155

5.1
  Introduction ......................................................................................................... 155

5.2
  Knowledge of the end ........................................................................................ 157

5.2.1
  Habituation and knowing the end ........................................................... 157
5.2.2
  Practical nous ................................................................................................ 162

5.2.2.1
  EN VI.8 1142a25-30 .............................................................................. 163

5.2.2.2
  EN VI.11 1143a35–b5 ........................................................................... 166

5.2.3
  Phantasia and knowing the end ................................................................. 172

5.3
  Knowledge of particulars and empeiria ........................................................... 182

5.3.1
  The two jobs of empeiria .............................................................................. 184

5.3.2
  Experience in practice ................................................................................. 187

5.3.3
  The function of empeiria in practical behaviour .................................... 191

5.4
  Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 198

6
  Akrasia and other flaws of practical thought ...................................................... 201

6.1
  Introduction ......................................................................................................... 201

6.2
  The 'pathetic' side of practical thought ............................................................ 204

6.2.1
  Akrasia as a hexis ........................................................................................ 205

6.2.2
  Akrasia and akolasia ................................................................................... 210

6.3
  The cognitive side of practical thought ........................................................... 218

6.3.1
  Knowledge as an argument ....................................................................... 220

6.3.2
  Akratic knowledge revealed ...................................................................... 227

6.3.3
  The physical account .................................................................................. 230

6.4
  Akratic knowledge ............................................................................................. 237

6.4.1
  The normal case ........................................................................................... 237

6.4.2
  The akratic case ............................................................................................ 241

6.4.3
  Akrasia vs. enkrateia ................................................................................... 246

6.5
  Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 252

7
  Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 253

7.1
  Recapitulation of the main results ................................................................... 253

7.2
  The plausibility of practical knowledge .......................................................... 256

7.3
  The point of practical knowledge ..................................................................... 261

Annex: Types of circumstance in EN III.6-12 and EN IV ............................................ 265

Glossary ............................................................................................................................. 267

Bibliography ...................................................................................................................... 271

I. Ancient works (Text editions and translations) ................................................... 271

Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics ............................................................................... 271

Eudemian Ethics ...................................................................................................... 271

Metaphysics .............................................................................................................. 272

Other works of Aristotle ......................................................................................... 272

Plato ........................................................................................................................... 273

II. General bibliography .............................................................................................. 273

Index locorum ................................................................................................................... 281

8
List of Aristotle's works and abbreviations
Below is a list of the Aristotelian texts mentioned in this work:
Latin Title English Title Abbreviation
Analytica Priora Prior Analytics APr
Analytica Posteriora Posterior Analytics APo
De Anima On the Soul DA
De Caelo On the Heavens Cael.
Categoriae Categories Cat.
Ethica Eudemia Eudemian Ethics EE
Ethica Nicomachea Nicomachean Ethics !"
De Generatione Animalium Generation of Animals GA
De Generatione et Corruptione On Generation and Corruption GC
De Historia Animalium History of Animals HA
De Interpretatione De Interpretatione DI
De Motu Animalium Movements of Animals MA
De memoria et reminiscentia On Memory Mem.
Metaphysica Metaphysics Meta.
Meteorologica Meteorology Meteor.
De Partibus Animalium Parts of Animals PA
Physica Physics Phys.
Politica Politics Pol.
Rhetorica Rhetoric Rhet.
Topica Topics Top.

The abbreviations are modelled on the basis of the Latin titles, not the Eng-
lish ones. For instance, the Nicomachean Ethics is abbreviated as EN not NE.
Most of the translations of Aristotle's works are mine. However, I have
found support from various existing translations. For the EN: Broadie and Rowe
2002; for the EE Inwood and Woolf 2013; for the DA Hicks 1907; for the rest of Aris-
totelian treatises, I have used the Revised Oxford Translation (Barnes 1985). Trans-
lations of other texts are indicated ad locum. When I add something in the text that
does not figure in the Greek, I have used angle brackets <...>, whereas when I make
a part of the Greek text explicit (e.g. pronouns), I have used square brackets [...].
I intended the text for any reader interested in Aristotle's moral epistemolo-
gy with basic knowledge of ancient philosophy. I have not presupposed knowledge
of Greek. I have used transliteration of Greek texts in the main text and left the use