Alexander of Aphrodisias – författare

The Supplement transmitted as the second book of On the Soul by Alexander of Aphrodisias (fl. c. 200 AD) is a collection of short texts on a wide range of topics from psychology, including the general hylomorphic account of soul and its faculties, and the theory of vision; questions in ethics (natural instincts, the unity of the virtues, the naturalness of justice and the insufficiency of virtue for happiness); and issues relating to responsibility, chance and fate. One of the texts in the collection, On Intellect, had a major influence on medieval Arabic and Western thought, greater than that of Alexander's On the Soul itself. The treatises may all be by Alexander himself; certainly the majority of them are closely connected with his other works. Many of them, however, consist of collections of arguments on particular issues, collections which probably incorporate material from earlier in the history of the Peripatetic school. This translation is from a new edition of the Greek text based on a collation of all known manuscripts and comparison with medieval Arabic and Latin translations.

This important commentary by Alexander of Aphrodisias on Aristotle's work on biochemistry was previously lost. However, four chapters of it have been re-identified in an Arabic translation by Emma Gannage and are here translated for the first time. The chapters were preserved in the writings of an eighth-century alchemist, Jabir ibn Hayyan. In addition to preserving an interesting example of very early cross-cultural scientific activity in the Muslim world, the newly discovered material is of philosophical importance: We learn how Alexander attempted to provide a unified theory that would unite Aristotle's chemistry with his elemental physics. As well as an English translation of the text, this volume includes a detailed introduction demonstrating the authenticity of the work and discussing its contribution to our understanding of ancient science.

In the second half of book 1 of the Prior Analytics, Aristotle reflects on the application of the formalized logic he has developed in the first half, focusing particularly on the non-modal or assertoric syllogistic developed in the first seven chapters. These reflections lead Alexander of Aphrodisias, the great late second-century AD exponent of Aristotelianism, to explain and sometimes argue against subsequent developments of Aristotle's logic and alternatives and objections to it, ideas associated mainly with his colleague Theophrastus and with the Stoics. The other main topic of this part of the Prior Analytics is the specification of a method for discovering true premises needed to prove a given proposition. Aristotle's presentation is sometimes difficult to follow, and Alexander's discussion is extremely helpful to the uninitiated reader. In his commentary on the final chapter translated in this volume, Alexander provides an insightful account of Aristotle's criticism of Plato's method of division.

The last 14 chapters of book 1 of Aristotle's "Prior Analytics" are concerned with the representation in the formal language of syllogistic of propositions and arguments expressed in more or less everyday Greek. In his commentary on those chapters, "Alexander of Aphrodisias" explains some of Aristotle's more opaque assertions and discusses post-Aristotelian ideas in semantics and the philosophy of language. In doing so he provides an unusual insight into the way in which these disciplines developed in the Hellenistic era. He also shows a more sophisticated understanding of these fields than Aristotle himself, while remaining a staunch defender of Aristotle's emphasis on meaning as opposed to Stoics concern with verbal formulation. In his commentary on the final chapter of book 1 Alexander offers a thorough discussion of Aristotle's distinction between denying that something is, for example, white and asserting that it is non-white.

This is the first of a two-volume edition of Alexander of Aphrodisias’ commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics. The new edition, which includes a philosophical and philological introduction, as well as notes on textcritical issues, is based on a critical evaluation of the entire manuscript tradition of the commentary. It also takes into account its indirect tradition and the Latin translation of Juan Ginès Sepúlveda.