プラトン『国家』とアリストテレス『ニコマコス倫理学』の比較研究<br>Levels of Argument : A Comparative Study of Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

個数:

プラトン『国家』とアリストテレス『ニコマコス倫理学』の比較研究
Levels of Argument : A Comparative Study of Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

  • 在庫がございません。海外の書籍取次会社を通じて出版社等からお取り寄せいたします。
    通常6~9週間ほどで発送の見込みですが、商品によってはさらに時間がかかることもございます。
    重要ご説明事項
    1. 納期遅延や、ご入手不能となる場合がございます。
    2. 複数冊ご注文の場合は、ご注文数量が揃ってからまとめて発送いたします。
    3. 美品のご指定は承りかねます。

    ●3Dセキュア導入とクレジットカードによるお支払いについて
  • 【入荷遅延について】
    世界情勢の影響により、海外からお取り寄せとなる洋書・洋古書の入荷が、表示している標準的な納期よりも遅延する場合がございます。
    おそれいりますが、あらかじめご了承くださいますようお願い申し上げます。
  • ◆画像の表紙や帯等は実物とは異なる場合があります。
  • ◆ウェブストアでの洋書販売価格は、弊社店舗等での販売価格とは異なります。
    また、洋書販売価格は、ご注文確定時点での日本円価格となります。
    ご注文確定後に、同じ洋書の販売価格が変動しても、それは反映されません。
  • 製本 Paperback:紙装版/ペーパーバック版/ページ数 248 p.
  • 言語 ENG
  • 商品コード 9780198801610
  • DDC分類 180

Full Description

In Levels of Argument, Dominic Scott compares the Republic and Nicomachean Ethics from a methodological perspective. In the first half he argues that the Republic distinguishes between two levels of argument in the defence of justice, the 'longer' and 'shorter' routes. The longer is the ideal and aims at maximum precision, requiring knowledge of the Forms and a definition of the Good. The shorter route is less precise, employing hypotheses, analogies and empirical observation. This is the route that Socrates actually follows in the Republic, because it is appropriate to the level of his audience and can stand on its own feet as a plausible defence of justice. In the second half of the book, Scott turns to the Nicomachean Ethics. Scott argues that, even though Aristotle rejects a universal Form of the Good, he implicitly recognises the existence of longer and shorter routes, analogous to those distinguished in the Republic. The longer route would require a comprehensive theoretical worldview, incorporating elements from Aristotle's metaphysics, physics, psychology, and biology. But Aristotle steers his audience away from such an approach as being a distraction from the essentially practical goals of political science. Unnecessary for good decision-making, it is not even an ideal. In sum, Platonic and Aristotelian methodologies both converge and diverge. Both distinguish analogously similar levels of argument, and it is the shorter route that both philosophers actually follow--Plato because he thinks it will have to suffice, Aristotle because he thinks that there is no need to go beyond it.

Contents

Introduction
Part One
1: The shorter route in Republic II-IV
2: The adequacy of the shorter route
3: The longer route
4: The role of metaphysics in Republic VIII-IX
5: The cave allegory and the structure of the Republic
Part Two
6: Political science and the longer route
7: The limits of precision
8: Explanation in NE I 4 and 7
9: Aristotle and the race course
10: The 'endoxic method'
Conclusion
Bibliography

最近チェックした商品