Philoponus : on Aristotle posterior analytics 1.1-8

192 Pages·2008·1.12 MB·English

by  John Philoponus

PHILOPONUS
On Aristotle
Posterior Analytics 1.1-8
This page intentionally left blank
PHILOPONUS
On Aristotle
Posterior Analytics 1.1-8
Translated by Richard McKirahan
Duckworth
Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
LONGDeOnNe(cid:2)(cid:222)r(cid:2)a(cid:48)l(cid:39) (cid:57)ed(cid:2)(cid:38)i(cid:39)to(cid:46)r(cid:42):(cid:43) (cid:2)R(cid:222)(cid:2)(cid:48)ic(cid:39)h(cid:57)a(cid:2)YrOd(cid:52) S(cid:45)o(cid:2)(cid:222)r(cid:2)SaYbDjiN(cid:39)(cid:59)
Bloomsbury Academic
An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc
First published in 2008 by
50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway
Gerald Duckworth & Co. Ltd.
London New York
WC1B9 30D-P93 Cowcross Street, London NEYC 110M01 86BF
UK Tel: [phone] USA
Fax: [phone]
www.bloomsbury.com
[email protected]
Bloomsbury is a registered trwadwew m.daurkc konf eBtl.ocoom.uskbury Publishing Plc
First published ©in 22000088 bbyy G Reriaclhda Drudc kMwcoKrtihr a&h Caon. Ltd.
(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:69)(cid:68)(cid:70)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:192)(cid:85)(cid:86)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:79)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:23)(cid:3)
All rights reserved. No part of this publication
© 2008 by Richard McKirahan
may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
Richard McKirahan has atrssaenrstemd ihtitse rdig, hints aunndye fro trhme C oorp ybryig ahnt,y D mesieganns sa,n edl ePcattreonntsi cA,ct, 1988, to be
mech(cid:76)a(cid:71)n(cid:72)(cid:81)ic(cid:87)(cid:76)a(cid:192)l(cid:72),(cid:71) p(cid:3)(cid:68)h(cid:86)o(cid:3)(cid:87)t(cid:75)o(cid:72)c(cid:3)(cid:36)op(cid:88)(cid:87)y(cid:75)i(cid:82)n(cid:85)g(cid:3)(cid:82),(cid:73) (cid:3)r(cid:87)e(cid:75)c(cid:76)(cid:86)o(cid:3)r(cid:90)d(cid:82)i(cid:85)n(cid:78)g(cid:17) or otherwise,
without the prior permission of the publisher.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by
any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or
retrieval systemA, w citahtoaulto pgruioer rpeecromridss fioonr itnh wisr ibtionogk f riosm a tvhaei plaubbllieshers.
from the British Library
No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining from action
as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury Academic or the author.
ISBN 9 78 07156 3667 1
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Acknowledgements
ISBN HB: 978-0-7156-3667-1
(cid:3) (cid:51)(cid:37)(cid:29)(cid:3) (cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:20)(cid:16)(cid:23)(cid:26)(cid:21)(cid:24)(cid:16)(cid:24)(cid:27)(cid:20)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:22)
The present translations have been made possible by generous and
(cid:3) (cid:72)(cid:51)(cid:39)(cid:41)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:27)(cid:16)(cid:20)(cid:16)(cid:23)(cid:26)(cid:21)(cid:24)(cid:16)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:24)(cid:20)(cid:16)(cid:25)
imaginative funding from the following sources: the National En-
dowmLiebnrta rfyo ro ft Cheo nHgruemssa Cnaittiaelso,g iDngiv-iinsi-oPnu bolfi cRateisoena Drcahta Programs, an
Ai cnadtaelpoeg nredceonrdt ffoerd tehrisa lb oaogke ins cayv aoifla tbhlee fUroSmA t;h eth Leib Lraervye orfh Cuolnmgree sTsr.ust; the
British Academy; the Jowett Copyright Trustees; the Royal Society
(UK); Centro InternAazcikonnoawlele Ad.g Bemeletnrtasme di Storia dello Spazio e del
TTehme pproe s(Penatd turaan)s;l Matiaorniso h Mavieg bneuecnc mi; aLdiev peorspsoibolle Ubyn giveneerrsoiutys ;a tnhde Leventis
imFagoiunantdivaet fiuonnd; inthg efr Aomrt tsh ea nfodll oHwiunmg saonuirtcieess: tRhee sNeaatriocnha lC Eonudnowciml;e Gntresham
for the Humanities, Division of Research Programs, an
College; the Esmée Fairbairn Charitable Trust; the Henry Brown
independent federal agency of the USA; the Leverhulme Trust; the
Trust; Mr and Mrs N. Egon; the Netherlands Organisation for
British Academy; the Jowett Copyright Trustees; the Royal Society
Scientific Research (NWO/GW); Dr Victoria Solomonides, the Cul-
(UK); Centro Internazionale A. Beltrame di Storia dello Spazio e del
tTuermapl oA (Pttaadcuhaé); Mofa trhioe M Gigrneueckci ;E Lmivberapsosoyl Uinni vLeorsnidtyo; nth. eT Lheev eendtiistor wishes
tFoo utnhdaantikon ;O thwee Anr tsG aonldd iHnu, mManaitriiejse RMeseaarrtcihjn B, oaMrdic ohf atheel BFreitrisehjohn, Don
MAcoardreimsoyn; ,t haen Eds mWéiel lFiaaimrb aCirhna Crhltaornita fbolre Tthruesitr; tchoem Hmenerny tBsr, oJwonhn Sellars
andT rMusat;r Mtinr aAncdh Marrsd N fo. rE pgorne;p tahrei Nnget thherel avnodlsu mOreg afonris patrieonss f,o arnd Deborah
(cid:54)B(cid:70)(cid:76)l(cid:72)a(cid:81)k(cid:87)(cid:76)e(cid:192) (cid:70)a(cid:3)(cid:53)t (cid:72)D(cid:86)(cid:72)u(cid:68)(cid:85)c(cid:70)k(cid:75)w(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:49)or(cid:58)th(cid:50),(cid:18) (cid:42)w(cid:58)h(cid:12)o(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:39) h(cid:85)(cid:3)a(cid:57)s(cid:76) (cid:70)b(cid:87)(cid:82)e(cid:85)e(cid:76)(cid:68)n(cid:3)(cid:54) t(cid:82)h(cid:79)(cid:82)e(cid:80) p(cid:82)(cid:81)u(cid:76)b(cid:71)(cid:72)li(cid:86)s(cid:15)(cid:3)h(cid:87)(cid:75)e(cid:72)r(cid:3) (cid:38)r(cid:88)e(cid:79)s(cid:87)(cid:88)p(cid:85)o(cid:68)n(cid:79)sible for
everAyt tvaochlué mof et hsei nGcree etkh Eem fibrassts.y in London. The editor wishes
to thank Peter Lautner, Ian Mueller, Edward Hussey, and Mossman
Roueché for their comments, John Sellars for preparing the
volume for press, and DebToyrpahe sBelta kbey a Rt Dayuc Dkwaovritehs, who has been
(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:79)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:75)P(cid:72)(cid:85)r(cid:3)(cid:85)in(cid:72)(cid:86)t(cid:83)e(cid:82)d(cid:81) (cid:86)a(cid:76)(cid:69)n(cid:79)d(cid:72)(cid:3) (cid:73)b(cid:82)o(cid:85)(cid:3)u(cid:72)(cid:89)n(cid:72)d(cid:85)(cid:92) i(cid:3)n(cid:89)(cid:82) G(cid:79)(cid:88)r(cid:80)e(cid:72)a(cid:3)(cid:86)t(cid:76) (cid:81)B(cid:70)r(cid:72)i(cid:3)(cid:87)t(cid:75)a(cid:72)i(cid:3)n(cid:192) (cid:85)b(cid:86)y(cid:87)(cid:17)
MPG Books Limited, Bodmin, Cornwall
Typeset by Ray Davies
Printed and bound in Great Britain
Contents
Conventions vi
Introduction 1
Textual Information 9
Translation 13
Notes 115
Appendix: Theorems from Euclid’s Elements 143
Bibliography 147
English-Greek Glossary 149
Greek-English Index 157
Index of Passages 179
Index of Names 182
Subject Index 183
Conventions
[(cid:125)] Square brackets enclose words or phrases that have been added to
the translation or the lemmata for purposes of clarity.
<(cid:125)> Angle brackets enclose conjectures relating to the Greek text, i.e.
additions to the transmitted text deriving from parallel sources and
editorial conjecture, and transposition of words or phrases. Accompany-
ing notes provide further details.
((cid:125)) Round brackets, besides being used for ordinary parentheses,
contain transliterated Greek words.
Introduction
Philoponus’ work, the earliest surviving commentary on the Posterior
Analytics, was not the first. Theophrastus wrote a commentary in seven
books,1while Galen boasts of having composed six commentaries on the
first book of the Posterior Analytics and five on the second,2 and Phi-
loponus himself refers to Alexander’s commentary.3 We do not know the
scale of these earlier works, but Philoponus’ commentary (333 CAG
pages on Book 1 alone) can claim to be among the longest ever written.
Maximilian Wallies’ edition, published in 1909, contains in addition to
Philoponus’ commentary on Book 1, the commentary on Book 2 that is
(by general agreement4 falsely) attributed to Philoponus, as well as an
anonymous commentary on Book 2. The present volume is the first of a
projected four which will present the first complete translation of
Philoponus’ commentary on Book 1 and pseudo-Philoponus’ on Book 2
into any modern language.5
Interest in this commentary has waned since the Renaissance, when
it was the first of Philoponus’ major philosophical works to be edited.6
It was twice translated into Latin in the sixteenth century, with the
translations being reprinted frequently from 1534 to 1569.7 In it Phi-
loponus sets himself the task of expounding the meaning of the
Aristotelian text rather than raising objections and presenting alterna-
tive theories in the ways that make some of his later commentaries
(notably the Physics commentary) important philosophical works in
their own right. Here, he is in the main content to follow the run of the
text, clarifying difficulties and explaining Aristotle’s statements in the
light of other passages in the Posterior Analytics or of other works of
Aristotle. Among these, he tends to limit his references to the other
logical works (the Categories, De Interpretatione, Prior Analytics, and
Topics), and to the Physics,Metaphysics, and De Anima. His practice of
explaining Aristotle through Aristotle has been standard ever since.
The opening words of the work, ‘John of Alexandria’s lecture notes
from the meetings of Ammonius, son of Hermeias, on the first book of
Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics, together with some observations of his
own’, indicate that it contains some original contributions of Phi-
loponus, but that it is largely a record of Ammonius’ views. The absence
of other testimony about Ammonius’ lectures on the Posterior Analytics
makes it impossible to determine how much is due to Philoponus. That
2 Introduction
Philoponus does not follow his teacher slavishly, however, is shown by
a passage in the section translated in the present volume in which he
rejects Ammonius’ explanation of 72b23-4 in favour of Themistius’,
which ‘seems to explain the thought of the present words more natu-
rally and in a way that naturally fits the passage’ (48,7-8). Criticisms of
Theophrastus (71,5-19) and Alexander (3,32-4,4; 41,1-6; 62,2-22) may
also display his originality, but they could equally well be due to
Ammonius.
Philoponus presumably decided to offer this sort of exposition of
Aristotle’s work because he thought that the Posterior Analytics is
difficult (and so, in need of a detailed guide and explanation), and also
because he thought that it is important. Whatever our view of its
importance, at least we may agree that it is difficult and in need of
clarification. It is neither a systematic exposition of its subject (the
theory of demonstration) nor does it proceed in the main by examining
earlier opinions on the subject, as is Aristotle’s frequent practice in
other works. Its train of thought from chapter to chapter, from para-
graph to paragraph, and even from sentence to sentence is frequently
obscure. The expression is also more condensed and opaque than is
usual for Aristotle, and there is relatively little argument, much of the
burden of the discussion being carried by examples (a practice which
Philoponus continues, adding additional examples of his own to the
many already in Aristotle).
And he makes it clear that he considers the Posterior Analytics
important. It is ‘the culmination of the treatment of logic. For it is for
the sake of demonstration that Aristotle gave us his other logical works’
(1,5-7). Also, since ‘there are several kinds of deductions – sophistical,
dialectical, and demonstrative – he teaches us demonstrative deduc-
tions here and dialectical ones in the Topics(cid:125) [and] in the Sophistical
Refutations he teaches us about sophistical deductions’ (2,1-7). Further,
‘philosophers needed demonstration as an instrument for the correct
pursuit of the parts of philosophy – I mean the theoretical and the
practical parts’ (2,24-5). So for Philoponus, the importance of the Poste-
rior Analytics resides in the fact that it is the crown jewel of Aristotle’s
logic, containing Aristotle’s account of demonstration (which is one of
the three basic types of deductions), and in the fact that a knowledge of
demonstration is useful (perhaps necessary) for anyone who would
study philosophy and possibly for anyone who would put philosophy to
correct use.
Characteristic of the commentary is a tendency to supplement Aris-
totle’s discussion, sometimes by working out Aristotle’s arguments and
examples in greater detail, sometimes by showing how Aristotle’s
claims apply to cases which he does not discuss, sometimes by drawing
distinctions not found in the Aristotelian text and exploring their
implications for the theory of demonstration. The first of these features
is found in the discussion of the law of alternating proportions. Aristotle
Introduction 3
says that there is a single proof that holds for all the things to which the
law applies: numbers, magnitudes, times, etc. Philoponus argues that
the subject of this proof is nameless. It is not ‘quantity’ because there
are kinds of quantity to which the law does not apply; and it is not a
subclass of quantity because it applies to certain qualities (74,3-75,3).
It is noticeable also in the detailed discussion (55,31-57,13) of the brief
statement ‘it has also been proved that in the other figures either there
is no deduction or [that there is a deduction] but not about what has
been assumed’ (73a15-16), in which Philoponus works out Aristotle’s
claim in terms of all three syllogistic figures.
The second feature is exemplified where Philoponus identifies ways
in which it is possible to know something in one way but not another
that are not mentioned by Aristotle (16,15-25; 18,4-20,2). Another case
is the treatment of inseparable accidents at 63,8-20. Also where he
employs snubness as an example of the second kind of per se relation –
an example not found in Aristotle’s discussion – and goes on to show
how it raises a problem for the interpretation (which Philoponus
adopts) that attributes that are per se in this way come in contradictory
pairs (like even and odd, for number), and offers a solution to the
problem (67,21-7).
An instance of the last-mentioned feature is his recognition of dem-
onstrations that fall short of Aristotle’s strict requirements. One kind
is exemplified by the proof that isosceles triangles have angles equal to
two right angles (which is not a strict demonstration because the
predicate belongs to triangle, not to isosceles triangle) (72,1-19). An-
other kind is proofs that genera and differentiae belong to a subject
(70,2-29). Still another is what he calls proofs by infallible signs (tek-
mêria), which proceed in the opposite direction from strict
demonstrations, from effects to causes, from what is better known to us
to what is better known in nature.8 An example of such a proof is the
inference from the pattern of the moon’s phases to the conclusion that
the moon’s shape is spherical (31,19-32,7). (Philoponus recognizes that
some signs are not infallible: having milk is a sign that a woman has
given birth, but, he says, it is not infallible (21,12-15).)
Also noteworthy is the prominence of mathematical and astronomi-
cal examples.9 In this practice Philoponus is following Aristotle’s lead,
but he employs them even more frequently than Aristotle does, and on
some occasions his comments are far more extensive than would be
required to explicate the text. The long treatment of the problem of
duplicating the cube (102,12-105,4) is the most extreme case. With the
exception of this last-mentioned case, the geometrical examples mostly
come from Euclid’s Elements and are of an elementary character. Some
of the discussions of properties of numbers probably come from Ni-
comachus’ Introductio Arithmetica, on which Philoponus wrote a
commentary.10 In this connection it is interesting that Philoponus is
guilty of a number of mathematical errors (see notes 94, 354, 355, 461,